|
> Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:32:21 +0300 > From: Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com > To: draft-ietf-radext-design@tools.ietf.org > CC: dromasca@avaya.com; gen-art@ietf.org; radext-chairs@tools.ietf.org > Subject: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-radext-design-07.txt > > Hi, > > 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. > > > Draft: draft-ietf-radext-design-07.txt > Reviewer: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> > Review Date: 8 April 2009 > > Summary: > > This draft is ready for publication as a BCP RFC. > > > Comments: > > ID nits complains that reference [8] appears in Appendix B.6 but not in > the References. > > The Introduction Section should be a non-normative section. However, > Section 1.1 uses normative statements (RECOMMENDED and NOT RECOMMENDED) > before those terms are defined in Section 1.3. > > The acronym AAA should be expanded. > > When referring to the appendixes, I think the draft should talk about > appendixes, not about sections. For example, it should talk about > Appendix A.5, not about Section A.5. > > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > |