[apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-rmt-fcast-07

Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info> Mon, 21 January 2013 04:00 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:00:01 -0500
Message-ID: <CAF1dMVFwfAc-q2zrF6nhTCvY=0wqZPzJj04dpU=WzTSDcuBQ9A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-rmt-fcast.all@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-rmt-fcast-07
Precedence: list

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for
this draft (for background on appsdir, please see
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate
).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-rmt-fcast-07
Title: FCAST: Scalable Object Delivery for the ALC and NORM Protocols
Reviewer: Joseph Yee
Review Date: 2013-01-20
IETF Last Call Date: 2013-01-22
IESG Telechat Date: 2013-01-24

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as Proposed Standard


Major Issues:
    None

Minor Issues:

    It takes me awhile to understand the document, partly I think the
information flow is broken (another part is that I'm not familiar with
the subject).  If the principle section (Section 3) was followed by
Implementation section (Section 5) instead, I think it will be better
to reader.  IMHO, the order of FCAST Principles -> Requirement for
Compliant Implementation -> Security Consideration would be a better
flow.

Nits:
    None, maybe a little xml comment to ask RFC Editors to help
reordering references based on RFC numbers :)

[apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-rmt-f… Joseph Yee
Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-r… Vincent Roca
Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-r… Joseph Yee