Christer, thanks for your review. Med, thanks for addressing his comments. I entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Jun 8, 2020, at 1:42 AM, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg=40ericsson.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > >> Thank you for the review. >> >> OK with all your suggestions. > > Thank You! :) > > Regards, > > Christer > > > > FWIW, you can track the changes to address your review at: https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=db0f6041-85afa3e8-db0f20da-86959e472243-5faeb82b3c90bf51&q=1&e=f43c50b7-ac0b-4eba-bc4b-55c0e7f8a2b9&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fboucadair%2Ffilter-control%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2FChrister's%20Review.pdf > > Cheers, > Med > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Christer Holmberg via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@xxxxxxxx] >> Envoyé : samedi 6 juin 2020 11:27 À : gen-art@xxxxxxxx Cc : >> draft-ietf-dots-signal-filter-control.all@xxxxxxxx; last- >> call@xxxxxxxx; dots@xxxxxxxx Objet : Genart last call review of >> draft-ietf-dots-signal-filter- >> control-04 >> >> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg >> Review result: Ready with Nits >> >> 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 >> >> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >> >> Document: draft-ietf-dots-signal-filter-control-04 >> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg >> Review Date: 2020-06-06 >> IETF LC End Date: 2020-06-15 >> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat >> >> Summary: The document is well written, and pretty much ready for >> publication. I do have a couple of minor editorial comments that I'd >> like the authors to address. >> >> Major issues: None >> >> Minor issues: None >> >> Nits/editorial comments: >> >> Q1: Please expand DOTS on first occurence. >> >> --- >> >> Q2: The Security Considerations say: >> >> "This specification does not allow to create new filtering rules, >> which is the responsibility of the DOTS data channel." >> >> Unless I missed it, I think it would be useful to state this also >> earlier in the document, e.g., in the Introduction. >> >> --- >> >> Q3: The Security Consideration say: >> >> "The security considerations discussed in >> [I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel] and [I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel] >> need >> to be taken into account." >> >> I think it is obvious that those security considerations need to be >> taken into account. I would suggest to re-phrase, and say something >> like: >> >> "The generic security considerations for DOTS signal channels are >> defined in [I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel]. The generic security >> considerations for DOTS data channels are defined in >> [I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel]. This Section defines the security >> considerations that are specific to the DOTS extension defined >> in this document." >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
