** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document
I'll find that.
== The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate
Huh? It's in there. Or is this document so old that it doesn't use
the precise recommended wording? I'll leave that for the RFC Editor.
idnits 2.11.12 found a few things (I've deleted a couple of
obviously incorrect "Missing Reference:" warnings):
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
== Unused Reference: 'RFC2045' is defined on line 475, but no
explicit
reference was found in the text
Not sure if this one is needed or not.
Added a reference.
== Unused Reference: 'RFC2183' is defined on line 486, but no
explicit
reference was found in the text
I've entered an RFC Editor note that updates the document to
reference this RFC.
Added.
** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1341 (Obsoleted by RFC 1521)
According to authors this reference is intentional.
It is.
Thanks David (and Alexey).
pr
--
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax:
(858)651-1102
_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
IMA at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima