Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-behave-dccp-03.txt

From: "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:15:08 +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-behave-dccp-03.txt
Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Review Date: 2008-10-17
IETF LC End Date: 2008-10-20

Summary: The draft is almost ready for publication, but perhaps as a BCP 
rather than as a "proposed standard". Please see some comments below.

Comments:

1) The draft says that it is intended to become a Standards Track. 
However, this document contains a collection of requirements. Typically 
Requirements draft are assigned to the category of Informational or BCP. 
I checked other similar requirement documents in the BEHAVE WG and their 
intended status is BCP. I think this draft should be a BCP.

2) As a matter of personal taste, I don't like to mention names of 
working groups in RFCs. This is because WGs are temporal arrangements. 
They stop existing after a few years, while RFCs are permanent. So, 
"BEHAVE" might not mean anything in the near future. This comment is due 
to the reference to "BEHAVE" in the abstract.

3) I know the RFC Editor allows well-known acronyms (e.g, TCP, UDP, and 
IP). But I am not so sure if "DCCP" and "SCTP" qualifies as well-known. 
So, it might be a good idea to expand it at a first occurrence 
(including the title).

4) Typo: Section 10, 5th paragraph, remove the dot "." in the middle of 
this sentence:

    Silently dropping the
    Listen makes it harder to diagnose network problems. and forces
    applications to wait for the DCCP stack to finish several
    retransmissions before reporting an error.

/Miguel
-- 
Miguel A. Garcia
+34-91-339-3608
Ericsson Spain
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2008 21:30:01 +0300

> intended status is BCP. I think this draft should be a BCP.

Right. Will change.

> to the reference to "BEHAVE" in the abstract.

So like "published by the IETF" instead of "published by the BEHAVE wg"?

> So, it might be a good idea to expand it at a first occurrence

That's going to be a long title, fine with me.

>     retransmissions before reporting an error.

Right.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://git.remlab.net/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=vlc-courmisch.git;a=summary
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:53:30 +0200

> So like "published by the IETF" instead of "published by the BEHAVE wg"?

Yeap, I think your proposal sounds fine.

/Miguel