Subject: [Gen-art] genart (light) review of draft-tschofenig-eap-ikev2-15

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 22:08:05 -0500

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-tschofenig-eap-ikev2-15
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date:  02 Oct 2007
IESG Telechat date: 04 Oct 2007

Summary: (light review) Ready for publication as Experimental minus nits

Comments:

I have checked the document for basic readability, nits, and  
references. I have not tried to put the actual protocol described in  
my head, leaving that for more qualified experts. At that level, I  
found the document fairly clear for the amount of mechanism being  
defined. I verified internal reference consistency and section  
references into the normative requirements.

Nits:

The 2119 language isn't boilerplate.

Reference 6 (to 3629) is not used.

Section 8.8 first sentence should probably start "The Certificate  
Request payload"

I understand there is some discussion already in progress on the IANA  
considerations section. I haven't seen the details of that  
discussion. If the following nit comments still make sense after that  
discussion concludes, consider

* suggesting a registry name

* (very trivial nit) last full paragraph on page 32 - change "outline  
in [9]" to "outlined in [9]". (If the polices are stated in this  
document, pointing at [9] seems a little redundant - if there's stuff  
in [9] that's missing here, then it's probably not an informative  
reference)

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