Hi, Ben, Thanks so much for your review! (and my appologies for the delay in my response). PLease find my comments inline... On 11/01/2011 04:55 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > Minor issues: > > -- section 3, paragraph after ISN formula: "It is vital that F not be > computable…" > > If it's vital for security reasons, it seems like this would be > worthy of normative language. Agreed. (good grief!) > -- Appendix B, Removal of "A Common TCP Bug" section: > > Can you comment on why the section was removed? Yes: it was argued that this information was historical data, and that if anybody wanted/needed to take a look, they could look at the original RFC1948. FWIW, I would have left this section in... but the wg had a different opinion... > Nits/editorial comments: > > -- abstract > > The abstract should explicitly mention the update to RFC793 Done. > -- section 1, 2nd paragraph: > > Please expand ISN on first mention Done. > -- informative references: > > Is there any way to avoid orphaning the last reference fragment? It's > confusing to find half a reference at the top of the next page. I'm sure the RFC-Editor will take care of this. P.S.: (All my "done", "fixed", etc., are subject to the documents shepard's agreement ;-) ) Thanks! Best regards, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf