Re: [RTG-DIR] Rtgdir last call review of draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-13

[Kathleen Moriarty <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ines,

We added the following reference into the working version per your comment:

http://www.jjsylvia.com/bigdatacourse/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/p14-verble-1.pdf

Thank you,
Kathleen

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Ines  Robles
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Kathleen,
>
> Ok, thank you for the feedback.
>
> Best,
>
> Ines.
>
> 2018-01-04 20:13 GMT+02:00 Kathleen Moriarty
> <[e-mail]>:
>>
>> Hello Ines,
>>
>> Thanks again for your review.  Edits have been made in our working
>> version that we hope to post soon.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Kathleen Moriarty
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > Ines,
>> >
>> > Thank you very much for your review!  We're working on the comments
>> > received and the nits you found will be addressed and are much
>> > appreciated.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Kathleen
>> >
>> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Ines Robles
>> > <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >> Reviewer: Ines Robles
>> >> Review result: Ready
>> >>
>> >> RtgDir review: draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-13.txt
>> >>
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this
>> >> draft. The
>> >> Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
>> >> drafts as
>> >> they pass through IETF last call and IESG review, and sometimes on
>> >> special
>> >> request. The purpose of the review is to provide assistance to the
>> >> Routing ADs.
>> >> For more information about the Routing Directorate, please see
>> >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/trac/wiki/RtgDir
>> >>
>> >> Although these comments are primarily for the use of the Routing ADs,
>> >> it would
>> >> be helpful if you could consider them along with any other IETF Last
>> >> Call
>> >> comments that you receive, and strive to resolve them through
>> >> discussion or by
>> >> updating the draft.
>> >>
>> >> Document: Effect of Pervasive Encryption on Operators -
>> >> draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-13 Reviewer: Ines Robles Review Date:
>> >> 12-11-2017
>> >> Intended status: Informational
>> >>
>> >> Summary:
>> >> This document discusses current security and network management
>> >> practices to
>> >> help guide protocol development in support of manageable, secure
>> >> networks.
>> >>
>> >> The draft is ready, few typos found.
>> >>
>> >> Comments:
>> >>
>> >> I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well written
>> >> and
>> >> clear to understand.
>> >>
>> >> Major Issues:
>> >>
>> >> No major issues found.
>> >>
>> >> Minor Issues:
>> >>
>> >> Section 2:
>> >>
>> >> "... Following the Snowden revelations,..." => It would be nice to add
>> >> some
>> >> references here
>>
>> Yes, the problem we have had so far is finding ones that aren't
>> articles that may not be stable.  A quick search pulls up new ones
>> like the following:
>> http://fortune.com/2016/04/25/snowden-encryption-james-clapper/
>>
>> We'll have to try again to find an academic publication.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Section 2.2.5:
>> >> "DRM..."=> I would expand it to  Digital Rights Management (DRM)
>>
>> Added, thank you!
>>
>> >>
>> >> Section 6:
>> >>
>> >> inlcudes=> includes
>>
>> Fixed, thanks.
>> >>
>> >> Section 6.1:
>> >> "information For example" => period missing?
>>
>> Ack, thanks!
>> >>
>> >> Section 6.2:
>> >> "soltuions" -> solutions
>> Fixed.
>> >>
>> >> Section 7.1 title:
>> >> "Encypted" => Encrypted
>> Fixed.
>>
>> Thanks for your review!
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Kathleen
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Kathleen
>
>



-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen