Reviewer: Bob Halley Review result: Ready I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate, see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/intdir/about/>. Based on my review, if I was on the IESG I would ballot this document as YES. While I am not an EAP or TLS expert, I found the document to be very clearly written, in particular in its explanations of why various choices were made. I did not see anything worrisome in the document. The following are minor issues (typos, misspelling, minor text improvements) with the document: 2.2: "when the j'th inner methods" seems like it would be better with "method". 4: "and then perform resumption using another EAP type, just as EAP-TTLS (Type 21)" should be "such as". -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
