Last Call Review of draft-melnikov-smtp-priority-
review-melnikov-smtp-priority-genart-lc-even-2012-03-14-00

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-melnikov-smtp-priority-09

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2012–3–13

IETF LC End Date: 2012–3–28

IESG Telechat date:



Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track

RFC

.



Major issues:



Minor issues:



1.



In section 4.2  “In absence of both the MT-PRIORITY MAIL FROM parameter  and
the MT-Priority header field, other message header fields, such  as Priority
[RFC2156] and X-Priority, MAY be used for determining the  priority under this
"Priority Message Handling" SMTP extension.” .      My understanding  from the
third bullet in this section is that for this case the message priority is “0”
so I am not clear what this sentence means and why is there a  difference if
the MT-PRIORITY or MT-Priority values do exist with regards to “Priority” and
“X-Priority” for this case.

2.



In section 8 “MT-PRIORITY=3”. I did not see where

the MT-PRIORITY SMTP  extension is specified and has the syntax of using “=”
before the value.





Nits/editorial comments:



1.



MUA is used in section 1 but expanded only in section 5.

2.



Some typos in section 5.

“

syntatically – syntactically” “prioritiy – priority” “comminicate –
communicate” “contraints –constraints”

3.



In section 10 for X.3.TBD3 “Description:  The message mas accepted” I assume
you meant “was”

4.



In section D.2 first paragraph some typos

“focusses –focuses” “comparision – comparison”