RE: Gen-ART IETF LC review of draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary

["Roni Even" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Karl,

I looked at the 05 version and it does not look like you fixed the nits

Roni

 

From: Karl Heinz Wolf [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 10:28 AM
To: Roni Even; General Area Review Team;
[e-mail]
Cc: IETF-Discussion list
Subject: AW: Gen-ART IETF LC review of
draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary

 

Roni,

thank you for your review and please apologize my delayed response.
I agree to your comments, the 2. one is really a good catch!

Thank you,
Karl



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [e-mail] im Auftrag von Roni Even
Gesendet: Sa 12/4/2010 4:41
An: 'General Area Review Team';
[e-mail]
Cc: 'IETF-Discussion list'
Betreff: Gen-ART IETF LC review of draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary

Hi,



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-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-04

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date: 2010-12-04

IETF LC End Date: 2010-12-14

IESG Telechat date: (if known)



Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC. There
are some nits



Major issues:



Minor issues:



Nits/editorial comments:

1.      In the abstract the document starts with LoST,  Please expand to
Location-to-Service Translation

2.      At the end of section 3.2  in the note, I think that the first
"getServiceListBoundary" should be " getServiceBoundary"







Roni Even