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(_at_)gont(_dot_)com(_dot_)ar ||
fgont(_at_)si6networks(_dot_)com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf