Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-capport-architecture-08
review-ietf-capport-architecture-08-genart-lc-halpern-2020-05-16-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-capport-architecture
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2020-05-25
Requested 2020-05-11
Authors Kyle Larose , David Dolson , Heng Liu
I-D last updated 2020-05-16
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -08 by Joel M. Halpern (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joel M. Halpern
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-capport-architecture by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 08 (document currently at 10)
Result Almost ready
Completed 2020-05-16
review-ietf-capport-architecture-08-genart-lc-halpern-2020-05-16-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-capport-architecture-08
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 2020-05-16
IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-25
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as an Informational RFC

Major issues:
    This document says it is Informational.  It says it describes "a" capport
    architecture.  But the third paragraph of the introduction says that this
    document standardizes an architecture.  The rest of this review assumes
    that is an error, and this is describing "an" architecture, rather than
    "the IETF" architecture.

Minor issues:
    The abstract really should expand "capport".   As simple as having the
    first sentence read "This document describes a "captive portal" (capport)
    archtiecture."

Nits/editorial comments:
    Following the first bulleted list in the introduction, the document reads:
    "this document does not yet describe...?  The word "yet" seems
    inappropriate.  We are pbulsihgin this as an RFC.  Please remove the "yet".