Telechat Review of draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-05
review-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-05-genart-telechat-sparks-2014-03-10-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64 |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 06) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2014-02-18 | |
Requested | 2014-02-06 | |
Authors | Mohamed Boucadair | |
I-D last updated | 2014-03-10 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -04
by Robert Sparks
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -05 by Robert Sparks (diff) Secdir Early review of -04 by Steve Hanna (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Robert Sparks |
State | Completed | |
Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64 by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 05 (document currently at 06) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2014-03-10 |
review-ietf-pcp-nat64-prefix64-05-genart-telechat-sparks-2014-03-10-00
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-pcp-nat64-prefix64-04 Reviewer: Robert Sparks Review Date: 3-Jan-2014 IETF LC End Date: 4-Jan-2014 IESG Telechat date: Unknown Summary: Ready with Nits Nits/editorial comments: There are several references to expired drafts (some very expired). If those are not going to progress, the details you wanted to call out would be better moved here. It's not clear which of the results in nat64-experiments you are pointing to for support for this document. Is the reference necessary? If so, can it be made more specific. In section 4.1, you restate the allowed values for length from RFC6052. Consider making the statement even clearer that these values are a consequence of RFC6052 and aren't being defined by this document. Something like "The allowed values are specified in RFC6052 (currently 4,5,6,7,8,12). (I almost didn't include this since that set's not likely to change, but somebody might copy the style...) RjS