Re: [secdir] Review of draft-gellens-lost-validation-05

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

On 4 Mar 2020, at 18:41, Shawn Emery wrote:

> Reviewer: Shawn M. Emery
> Review result: Ready
>
> I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
> ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
> IESG.
> These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security
> area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these
> comments just like any other last call comments.
>
> This draft specifies an IANA registry for the Location-to-Service
> Translation
> (LoST) Protocol Validation Service Tag under U-NAPTR.
>
> The security considerations section does exist and refers to RFC 3958 
> and
> 4848.
> I agree that this change does not introduce any new security 
> considerations.
>
> General comments:
>
> None.
>
> Editorial comments:
>
> Abbreviations should be expanded in the title of the draft and when 
> first
> used (in this case the Abstract).
> s/...//
>
> Shawn.
> --

Thanks for your review, Shawn.  Just to clarify, your suggestion is that 
"S-NAPTR" be expanded in the Abstract, e.g., by adding "(Straightforward 
Name Authority PoinTeR)".

--Randall