Facsimile Using Internet Mail (IFAX) Service of ENUM
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.
(Scott Hollenbeck) Yes
(Steven Bellovin) (was Discuss) No Objection
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
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
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?". 3. > 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.