Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lmap-framework-11
review-ietf-lmap-framework-11-genart-lc-taylor-2015-03-09-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lmap-framework
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 14)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-03-09
Requested 2015-02-25
Authors Philip Eardley , Al Morton , Marcelo Bagnulo , Trevor Burbridge , Paul Aitken, Aamer Akhter
I-D last updated 2015-03-09
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -11 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Secdir Early review of -08 by Radia Perlman (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -11 by Radia Perlman (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -11 by Sarah Banks (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Tom Taylor
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-lmap-framework by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 11 (document currently at 14)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2015-03-09
review-ietf-lmap-framework-11-genart-lc-taylor-2015-03-09-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document:  draft-ietf-lmap-framework-11
Reviewer:  Tom Taylor
Review Date: 2015/03/05
IETF LC End Date: 2015/03/09
IESG Telechat date: 2015/03/12



Summary: Beautifully written and very complete. A few editorial nits 


that could be safely ignored without affecting the utility of the document.




Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

Section 3, "Logging Information": s/and which/which/



Section 5, bullet 1.: not sure a protocol is trying to achieve a 


problem. Achieve a solution to a problem (solve or resolve it) or 


achieve an objective, perhaps.






Section 7, second paragraph: should delete the reference to the charter, 


since that is ephemeral information. I would rephrase as follows:



 s/similar to the protocol/just as is the protocol/