Gen-ART LC review of draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload-08

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document:  draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload-08

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2015–4-27

IETF LC End Date: 2015–5-13

IESG Telechat date:

 

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Standard Track  RFC.

 

 

Major issues:

Minor issues:

 

 

 

Nits/editorial comments:

Some questions about the terminology in section 3

  1. Client – is this different from RFC6940, if not why repeat?
  2. Router – this is a different name for a peer? I also noticed that it is used once in the document (defining constrained node) where it does not provide any value
  3. Proxy and Proxy node – Why do you need both terms. In section 7 it uses proxy(PN) like it is the same term.
  4. Constrained node the last sentence “In the latter case the node is often connected to a  continuous energy power supply” it is not clear what is the latter case, also what type of node is meant. Note that there is a redundant “either a” in the previous sentence.

 


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]