Actually, since a specific MASA signs a specific pledge on behalf of a
single manufacturer, the use of "manufacturer's" is correct. However,
it would be clearer if "the" were inserted before "manufacturer's".
Bill
On 11/30/2024 5:37 PM, Jim Fenton via Datatracker wrote:
Attention This email originates from outside the concordia.ca domain. // Ce courriel provient de l'extérieur du domaine de concordia.ca
Reviewer: Jim Fenton
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am the designated artart reviewer for this draft.
Thanks for addressing all of my comments on -12. They are all addressed in the
text with the exception of my question on why this is separate from
ietf-anima-rfc3866bis, which was answered on the mailing list. This draft is
ready to go with the exception of a few tiny editorial nits:
Section 1, paragraph 1 move (BRSKI) and (SZTP) inside the quotes since that is
part of the titles of the RFCs.
Section 1, paragraph 3 "as enhancement of" -> "as an enhancement of"
Section 2, definition of voucher: "statement from Manufacturer" -> "statement
from a Manufacturer"
Section 2, definition of MASA: manufacturer's -> manufacturers'
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- anima@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to anima-leave@xxxxxxxx
--
Dr. J.W. Atwood, Eng. tel: +1 (514) 848-2424 x3046
Distinguished Professor Emeritus fax: +1 (514) 848-2830
Department of Computer Science
and Software Engineering
Concordia University ER 1234 email:william.atwood@xxxxxxxxxxxx
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~bill
Montreal, Quebec Canada H3G 1M8
--
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
