[Emu] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-03

Menachem Dodge via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Sun, 24 May 2020 08:46 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Menachem Dodge via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id.all@ietf.org, emu@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <159030999389.18523.3562586090873207782@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Menachem Dodge <menachemdodge1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 01:46:33 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emu/vm2JEL8I2i_Q8ydLPQ-giygrYc0>
Subject: [Emu] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-03

Reviewer: Menachem Dodge
Review result: Has Nits

The document is well written and clearly expressed.

I have a couple of nits:

1. The paragraphing could be made clearer in my opinion. "Section 2.3
Rationale" is the Rationale for sections 2.1 and 2.2 so I would put this in the
section header, "Section 2.3 Rationale for EAP-AKA and EAP-SIM updates". it may
be worth putting Section 2.4 as a separate numbering like 3. "Session-Id for
PEAP" to keep it separate from 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3.

2. Is  "Rationale" needed for the section 2.4 "Session-Id for PEAP"?  I suppose
that as it is missing altogether the "rationale" is implied but it may be worth
adding a sentence to keep consistency in the document.

[Emu] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-emu-e… Menachem Dodge via Datatracker