Stewart, thanks for your review. I entered a DISCUSS ballot to check on the obsoleted references to RFC 4091 and RFC 4092. Alissa > On Jun 17, 2019, at 6:05 AM, Stewart Bryant via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-mmusic-ice-sip-sdp-36 > Reviewer: Stewart Bryant > Review Date: 2019-06-17 > IETF LC End Date: 2019-06-20 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: This is very much a review by a non-specialist. The document is well > written, but has a small number of nits that need looking at before publication. > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: None > > Nits/editorial comments: > > ID-Nits points out the following: > -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4091 > (Obsoleted by RFC 5245) > -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4092 > (Obsoleted by RFC 5245) >> From the text it looks like the updated RFC should be the reference that this > memo uses. > > ==== > The following abbreviations are not in the RFC Editor's well known list and > should be expanded on first use: > STUN > SDP > FQDN > PSTN > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
