Last Call Review of draft-templin-intarea-seal-51
review-templin-intarea-seal-51-genart-lc-holmberg-2013-02-19-2-00
Request | Review of | draft-templin-intarea-seal |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 68) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2013-02-19 | |
Requested | 2013-02-14 | |
Authors | Fred Templin | |
I-D last updated | 2013-02-19 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -51
by Christer Holmberg
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -51 by Christer Holmberg (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -51 by David Harrington (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Christer Holmberg |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-templin-intarea-seal by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 51 (document currently at 68) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2013-02-19 |
review-templin-intarea-seal-51-genart-lc-holmberg-2013-02-19-2-00
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> Document: draft-templin-intarea-seal-51.txt Reviewer: Christer Holmberg Review Date: 19 Feb 2013 IETF LC End Date: 20 Feb 2013 IETF Telechat Date: 21 Feb 2013 Summary: The draft is well written, but with some editorial comments that I suggest to be addressed before publication. Major Issues: None Minor Issues: None Editorial nits: See below Q_ED_1: Most of the text in the Abstract section does not belong there. The section should talk about what the document does, and not define what a subnetwork is etc. Only the last sentence talks about what the draft is about. Q_ED_2: In the Introduction section, I would suggest to add a reference for IP encapsulating/tunneling. RFC 2003 is referenced later in the document, but I think it would be good to have something also in the Introduction. Q_ED_3: In section 1.2, do you need to define ‘subnetwork’ here? Isn’t it better to have the definition in one single place – the Terminology section? Q_ED_4: In section 12, there seems to be a dot too much J Best regards, Christer