Facsimile Using Internet Mail (IFAX) Service of ENUM
RFC 4143

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.

(Scott Hollenbeck) Yes

(Steven Bellovin) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2004-07-06)
No email
send info
It would be nice if the sentence in the Security Considerations section referring to 3761 noted that that document discussed the DNS-specific security issues.

(Margaret Cullen) No Objection

(Bill Fenner) No Objection

(Ted Hardie) No Objection

(David Kessens) No Objection

(Allison Mankin) No Objection

Comment (2004-07-07)
No email
send info
I reviewed this carefully in an earlier version and had them bring it into line with
the other enumservice documents.  Also noted:  IANA has checked.

(Bert Wijnen) No Objection

(Alex Zinin) No Objection

Comment (2004-07-06)
No email
send info
Draft: draft-ietf-fax-faxservice-enum-03
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Date: July 5, 2004

Fundamentally this seems ready to go as PS.

I have a little concern about the security section.

1. s/Security Consideration/Security Considerations/
(in three places)

2. The third paragraph about "sacrificial" email accounts
and the non-existence of "sacrifical" E.164 numbers seems
out of place to me - it adds nothing useful, and the reader
is left wondering "why did they tell me that?".

>    Due to the implications of publishing data on a globally accessible
>    database, as a principle the data subject MUST give their explicit
>    informed consent to data being published in ENUM.

I don't really see this as an RFC 2119 "MUST". Lower case would be fine.
The English in this sentence needs cleaning, too.