Last Call Review of draft-ietf-kitten-cammac-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-kitten-cammac
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-12-04
Requested 2015-11-20
Draft last updated 2015-12-03
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -00 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -00 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Meral Shirazipour
Opsdir Last Call review of -00 by Qin Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Meral Shirazipour
State Completed
Review review-ietf-kitten-cammac-04-genart-lc-shirazipour-2015-12-03
Reviewed rev. 04
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2015-12-03


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 <>.



Document: draft-ietf-kitten-cammac-04

Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour

Review Date: 2015-12-02

IETF LC End Date:  2015-12-04 (2



IESG Telechat date: 2015-12-17 




This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some comments/nits.


Major issues:


Minor issues:


Nits/editorial comments:

[Page 3] 2nd and 3rd paragraph: The word "service" is used to designate both the proxy-service and the second backend "application-service" as per [MS-SFU]. This may confuse the reader at first read.

Suggestion would be to use "proxy-service" and "application-service". [Page 8] after point "2." would also benefit from clearer use of these terms.


[Page 8], last paragraph, it was not clear to me if  "service principal" is the "application service"?


Best Regards,



Meral Shirazipour