Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc3946bis-01.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 19:55:09 +0200

Attached is my review of the specified document, submitted as part of
the Gen-ART process.  For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

Summary: ready

Note I am not an expert in the domain (and the only person I trust
in this role is already a co-author of the document) and there are
only a few difference between the RFC 3946 and this revision.
BTW for this kind of revision document it should be fine to have
a structured diff. I know the RFC editor has a tool to produce this
but this should be provided at least for last calls.

About the document itself:
 - the way (name, reference, ...) to refer to the ITU and ANSI documents
 is not very unified (RFCs are easier, just put [RFCXXX] :-).
 - the IANA considerations are from the original RFC 3946 (but
 no new IANA action is required). I don't know what is the formal
 way to handle IANA considerations in revisions.
 - Eric's phone number has an optional digit, something which is
 impossible according to ITU E.123 (we have the same issue in France,
 IMHO the international form of phone numbers must not have the optional
 0 after the country prefix, now it seems that local rules are different :-)

Regards

[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 13:51:54 +0200

hi francis

thanks for the review, i guess that the comments you have provided can be
dealt during the RFC edition, if not please advise

thanks,
- dimitri.

Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Sent by: [email-masked]
03/05/2006 19:55
 
        To:     [email-masked]
        cc:     [email-masked], [email-masked], Dimitri 
PAPADIMITRIOU/BE/ALCATEL@ALCATEL
        Subject:        review of draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc3946bis-01.txt

Summary: ready

 0 after the country prefix, now it seems that local rules are different 
:-)

Regards