Last Call Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10
review-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10-secdir-lc-miller-2016-08-19-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes |
|---|---|---|
| Requested rev. | no specific revision (document currently at 11) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2016-08-06 | |
| Requested | 2016-07-21 | |
| Authors | Marc Petit-Huguenin, Gonzalo Salgueiro | |
| Draft last updated | 2016-08-19 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -10 by Joel Halpern
(diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -10 by Matthew Miller (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Mehmet Ersue (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Matthew Miller |
| State | Completed | |
| Review | review-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10-secdir-lc-miller-2016-08-19 | |
| Reviewed rev. | 10 (document currently at 11) | |
| Review result | Ready | |
| Review completed: | 2016-08-19 |
Review
review-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10-secdir-lc-miller-2016-08-19
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments that arrived on time. Document: draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5764-mux-fixes-10 Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller Review Date: 2016-08-19 IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-06 IESG Telechat date: N/A Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Standards Track document. This document updates RFC 5764 to update the receiver's demultiplexing to account for all the known packet types, and explicitly updates the IANA registries that were previously implicitly impacted, including changes in allocations of the registries to require coordination. Major issues: NONE Minor issues: NONE Nits/editorial comments: * This document uses "RFC XXXX" or "RFCXXXX" to, I assume, reference this document. It may be worth calling this out explicitly for the RFC Editor, although I don't think this requires an update to this document. -- - m&m Matt Miller Cisco Systems, Inc.