[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Subject: I-D Action:draft-tiwari-radext-tunnel-type-01.txt (fwd)
I have submitted the new draft addressing the most of the feedbacks received from Glen - except splitting the draft into two (individual tunnel id request for each tunnel).
From: Glen Zorn [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 5:54 PM
To: Abhishek Tiwari
Subject: RE: Subject: I-D Action:draft-tiwari-radext-tunnel-type-01.txt (fwd)
Glancing over this:
Since there's only one author, it would be good to move the apostrophe in
In the table in Section 3, move the abbreviation (ESP) next to "Payload".
Since new values of the Tunnel-Type Attribute are allocated by IETF
Consensus, it might be a better idea to separate this into 2 docs, one for
the ESP value & the other for the proprietary one. In fact, because the
spec for the Microsoft Secure Socket Tunneling Protocol is public & appears
fairly stable, I would prefer that the allocation be part of an
Informational RFC describing the protocol. At the very least, though, the
name needs to be changed to "Microsoft's Secure Socket Tunneling Protocol"
(or something similar) that identifies its proprietary nature.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.