Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-10

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 12:52:54 +0200

Thanks for the review! Authors, did you note the comments?

Jari

On 26 Oct 2016, at 02:29, Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-httpauth-mutual-10
> Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
> Review Date:             2016-10-25
> IETF LC End Date:     2016-10-25
> IESG Telechat date: 2016-11-03
> 
> Summary:
> This draft is ready to be published as Experimental RFC, but I have some comments.
> 
> Major issues:
> Minor issues:
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> -General: the introduction should clarify the downside or extra complexity with the proposed method (does the client need to be modified? what was the reason the web did not opt for this method at first place? are there cases where this method cannot be applied?
> 
> -[Page 4], "are a one of"----->"are one of"
> 
> -[Page 46], Section 18, not sure if it should be left in the RFC or removed? Please check with chair or Responsible AD.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Meral
> ---
> Meral Shirazipour
> Ericsson Research
> www.ericsson.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art