[radext] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05
Tim Evens <tievens@cisco.com> Tue, 14 August 2018 00:24 UTC
Return-Path: <tievens@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: radext@ietf.org
Delivered-To: radext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9685C1310FE; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 17:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Tim Evens <tievens@cisco.com>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: radext@ietf.org, draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.83.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153420629857.24982.2722057727598250846@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 17:24:58 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/radext/4FqKn_b1e_Xj9OrDBUwQ5KaJQyQ>
Subject: [radext] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-05
X-BeenThere: radext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
List-Id: RADIUS EXTensions working group discussion list <radext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/radext/>
List-Post: <mailto:radext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/radext>, <mailto:radext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:24:59 -0000
Reviewer: Tim Evens Review result: Ready with Nits I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-radext-coa-proxy-?? Reviewer: Tim Evens Review Date: 2018-08-13 IETF LC End Date: 2018-08-13 IESG Telechat date: 2018-08-16 Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be fixed before publication. Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: Abstract contains "Section 3.1" which becomes an HTML reference link. This incorrectly links to the current draft section 3.1, not the intended RFC5176 Section 3.1. This is repeated in the introduction. IMO, that last sentence would read better with "corrects the omission" instead of "that." Code points are not summarized in IANA Considerations section. The references are not formatted per RFC7322. The HTML rendering of Section 2.2 CoA Processing does not render the RFC5176 link correctly. Bracketed references normally are followed by some text. IMO, considering this draft updates 5176, I feel it would be better for the problem statement to be clearer on updates and clarifications. In section 3.3, while humorous, I suggest dropping "on the planet." Section 6 Security Considerations link for Section 11 of RFC6929 is missing keyword "of." This results in two links instead of the correct link.