[sfc] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-integrity

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Dear Authors,
thank you for your work on this very important and well-written document.
It is easy to read and grasp the technical concept of the proposed
solutions. Below, please find my notes and proposals addressing editorial
nits:

   - s/referred to is/referred to as/
   - s/integrity protected/integrity-protected/g
   - s/access to an information/access to information/
   - s/See for example,/See, for example,/
   - Is there a need to use the normative language in the following text or
   make the "should adopt" text more assertive:

      An NSH-aware SF can also be instructed about the behavior it
      should adopt after consuming a context information that was
      supplied in the NSH.


   - s/a context information/context information/
   - s/A first level/The first level/
   - s/A second level/The second level/
   - s/four octet/four-octet/
   - s/The documents does not/The document does not/
   - s/for certain amount/for a certain amount/
   - s/variable length/variable-length/
   - s/excluding/, excluding/g
   - s/In typical deployments/In typical deployments,/
   - s/used to integrity protect/used to protect the integrity of/g
   - s/proceeds then/proceeds/
   - s/been tampered/been tampered with/
   - s/such those/such as those/
   - s/out of scope/out of the scope/
   - s/rate limited/rate-limited/
   - s/secdir/SecDir/ or extend it completely

Regards,
Greg