Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-pim-lasthop-threats-04.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:36:12 +0200

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-ietf-pim-lasthop-threats-04.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2008-05-19
IETF LC End Date: 2008-05-23
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Comments: mainly editorial comments, i.e., should be handled by the RFC Editor:
 - ToC and section 5 page 11: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

 - Introduction page 3: abbrevs should be introduced (including PIM as
  the abstract is not considered as a part of the document body).

 - section 2 page 3: signalling -> signaling

 - section 2.5 page 5: behaviour -> behavior

 - section 2.6 page 5: TTL -> time-to-live

 - section 4.2 page 8: the reference to GDOI is fine but as GDOI is old
  and there are many newer things. IMHO you should check with the msec
  WG chairs if they have something to add, or for instance you could announce
  this last call in the msec WG list...

Regards

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

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:14:05 +0300 (EEST)

Hi Francis,

Thanks for your mostly editorial comments.

Wrt your GDOI comment, I asked MSEC chairs and they were fine with that 
text.  We worked up some editorial improvements in another paragraph, 
however.

There were no other Last Call comments.

I think the document is in good enough shape for IESG evaluation and I can 
make all the corrections at the same time when we get IESG comments.  If 
our AD or WG chairs think differently, please yell.