Ted, > First, let me start by saying that -09, which was put out for Last Call, was a substantial > improvement over the -08. I normally read Last Call documents using a diff tool, > and the number of really solid additions in this update was quite high. I was a bit > surprised, given the extent of the new text, that there was no WG last call, but > I assume that the WG is reviewing the changes in parallel. ... > I assume that the issuance > of -10, which came out during the last call, was a response to one or more reviews > from the WG or solicited experts. > Thanks for your review. Just for information about the versions. -09 was issued in response to AD review comments; the review and the required changes were discussed on the mailing list during January. (I normally do not ask for WGLC to be repeated based on changes relating to AD review, unless, of course, the document needs to go back to the WG process for redesign. Or if the discussion shows that there the changes are contentious.) When -09 came out it was OK from my perspective except for one issue relating to the handoff indicator semantics. I started the Last Call anyway but asked the authors to fix the remaining issue in -10 in parallel. There has been a small amount of editorial corrections etc that have been detected in the WG in the meanwhile and those have also been put into -09 and -10. Authors, WG, please respond to Ted's technical comments. Jari _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf