Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-tls-07

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 11:54:23 -0700

Meral, thanks for your review. Brian, thanks for addressing the points raised. I have ballotted no-objection but am following the discussion from others’ DISCUSSes.

Alissa

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
>   Thank you.
>  
> Best,
> Meral
>  
> From: Brian Raymor [mailto:[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>] 
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 11:15 AM
> To: Meral Shirazipour <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>>; [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>; [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> Subject: RE: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-core-coap-tcp-tls-07
>  
>  
> Thanks for your feedback.
>  
> > Nits/editorial comments: 
> > -Please spell out acronyms at first use.
>  
> I will correct the BERT case and also review https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt <https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt> for other potential cases.
>  
> Tracked in https://github.com/core-wg/coap-tcp-tls/issues/132 <https://github.com/core-wg/coap-tcp-tls/issues/132>
>  
> > -Not sure if other documents address this, but does this document assume fixed CoAP devices
> > as end point (not > moving and connectivity is assumed 'the same' during the TCP session?)
>  
> It assumes fixed CoAP devices.
>  
> …Brian
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>