Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-simon-emu-rfc2716bis-12.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 22:23:45 +0100

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 resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-simon-emu-rfc2716bis-12.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2008-01-09
IETF LC Date: 2007-12-27
IESG Telechat date: 2008-01-10

Summary: Ready

Comments: I have some editorial comments (editorial means they should be
handled by the RFC Editor):
 - 2.1 page 4: s/backend security server/backend authentication server/
 - 2.1.1 page 5: s/e.g. /e.g., /
 - 2.1.2 page 7: s/remoted/remote/
 - 2.2 page 16: s/need not be/needs not be/ (subject is "the identity")
 - 5.1 page 22: s/KDF/key derivation function/
 - 5.2 page 24: s/RDN/relative distinguished name (RDN)/
 - 5.2 page 24: s/CN/CommonName (CN)/ ? (I know CN is more used than the
  full name but as far as I know the official name is CommonName)
  Note there could be other not introduced abbrevs
 - 5.3 pages 24 and 25: s/conformant/compliant/ ?
 - 6.2 page 28: s/Bands" IEEE 802.16e/Bands", IEEE 802.16e/
 - Acknowledgments page 29: it is not usual to add the companies
 - Authors' Addresses page 30: please add USA (yes! :-)

For the iESG I am not very satisfied with the reference to the NIST
SP800-57: this document is a good one and it is better to reference
it than to leave nothing but the IETF is an international body so
one could complain about the National in NIST... I don't know if it
really matters, BTW it is an informative reference, but it should be
nice to find a way to avoid any complains for this kind.
(Note I don't complain but I know the editor of the similar French gov
text (from an organization with the same N in its name :-) so I am
trying to understand what he should think about this point).

Thanks

[email-masked]

PS: as EAP-TLS seems to still be the only blessed EAP method usable
according to RFC 4017 it is (was now) very important to have a high
quality new version of 2716, so again thanks!

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