Re: [tcpm] WGLC: draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-02.txt

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Thanks so much for your feedback! Comments inline....


> It seems a bit pointless to repeat the same text in the introduction and
> in section 2.1 - in
> the first paragraph of the introduction, the part that starts with:
> "permits a point in the data
> stream to be designated .... " and ends with: "the TCP must tell user to
> go into "normal mode" "
> (which, by the way, misses a "the" before "user".)
> 
> I think that this part could safely be removed from the introduction and
> just kept in section 2.1,
> and the reference at the end of the first paragraph should then be moved
> there too.

Should I move/collapse the first two paragraphs of Section 1
(Intorduction) to/into Section 2.1?



> Section 3.4:
> "As a result of the publication of Network Intrusion Detection (NIDs)
> evasion techniques based on
> TCP urgent indications [phrack], some middle-boxes clear the urgent
> indications by clearing the
> URG flag and setting the Urgent Pointer to zero."
> 
> => are you 100% sure that this is the result of the publication of these
> techniques? Otherwise I'd rather state this with "perhaps".

Yes. The source was an inside man. ;-) (FWIW, *me*, I thought it was a
result of the infamous windows OOB nuke, but it seems it wasn't the case).




> a bit further down:
> "Examples of such middle-boxes are Cisco PIX firewall [Cisco-PIX]."
> 
> should be "An example of such a middle-box is the ..."

Will fix this.



> next sentence:
> "This should discourage applications to depend"
> =>
> "This should discourage applications from depending"
> (I think - I'm not a native speaker myself)

On second read (from me, a non-native English speaker), your text sounds
better.

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1