[mile] Some comments on draft-ietf-mile-jsoniodef

["Panwei (William)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I've read this draft and I have some comments as followings.

1. Lack of links for the RFCs and BCPs which are referenced. These items be referenced don't have hyperlinks in this draft.
2. RFC7203 and RFC7213 are referenced in the draft, but are not included in section 9 "References".
3. Section 1.1 should be changed to the following description according to RFC8174.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119][RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
4. In section 2.2.2, the comma "," after the last object of "SoftwareReference" should be deleted.
"SoftwareReference": {
  "value": "cpe:/a:google:chrome:59.0.3071.115 ",     //STRING
  "spec-name": "cpe",                                 //ENUM
  "dtype": "string",                                  //ENUM
}
5. In section 2.2.4, the "String" should be changed to "STRING" like the other sections. And the comma "," after the last object of "ExtensionType" should be deleted.
"ExtensionType": {
  "value": "xxxxxxx",                                 //String
  "name": "Syslog",                                   //String
  "dtype": "string",                                  //String
  "meaning": "Syslog from the security appliance X",  //String
}
6. In section 3.1, the table should have a formal name prefixed with "Table 1:" or "Figure 1:".
7. In section 3.1, also in the table, the values of the "Corresponding Section in [RFC7970]" column are all wrong on the "System" line and below.
    For example, the table says the System Class corresponds to Section 3.16 in RFC7970, but actually corresponds to Section 3.17 in RFC7970.
8. In section 4, there are two typos, as the red words in the following. First, "example" should be "examples". Second, "the the" should be "the".
This section provides example of IODEF documents. These examples do
not represent the full capabilities of the data model or the the only
way to encode particular information.
9. In section 7, the draft says "This document registers a JSON schema", but it doesn't describe what the JSON schema is.
10. In Appendix A, the table should have a formal name, now it only has a prefix "Figure 8".

Best Regards
Wei Pan