[Mipshop] AD review of the rfc5268bis document
Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Mon, 13 April 2009 08:46 UTC
Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: mipshop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mipshop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2162C3A6CC9 for <mipshop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:46:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RUipjIDj+Xfj for <mipshop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:46:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D40023A67AE for <mipshop@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:46:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEC9519871D; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 11:48:04 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 525DC198665; Mon, 13 Apr 2009 11:48:04 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <49E2FC3C.2020903@piuha.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 11:47:56 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis@tools.ietf.org, Mipshop <mipshop@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Subject: [Mipshop] AD review of the rfc5268bis document
X-BeenThere: mipshop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <mipshop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop>, <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mipshop>
List-Post: <mailto:mipshop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop>, <mailto:mipshop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 08:46:56 -0000
I have reviewed this specification and found no issues -- good work! It has been sent to IETF Last Call. There were one or two missing "the" words and commas here and there -- perhaps due to missing some fixes done to RFC 5268 by the RFC Editor, or because they were mistakes that you on purpose corrected. Here's the diff. In case you need to revise the document for some reason you could take a look at these as well. http://www.arkko.com/ietf/mipshop/draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis-01-from-rfc5268.diff.html Jari
- [Mipshop] AD review of the rfc5268bis document Jari Arkko
- Re: [Mipshop] AD review of the rfc5268bis document Vijay Devarapalli
- Re: [Mipshop] AD review of the rfc5268bis document Jari Arkko