"Susan Hares" <shares(_at_)ndzh(_dot_)com> writes:
Thank you for taking the time do a second careful review. I can only wish
I such an excellent review of documents I am an editor on. Version 14
addresses all of your comments.
Thanks! -15 looks great, except (ugh) for one remaining nit:
Sue: Dale I rewrote the whole paragraph in version 14.
When I read the new paragraph, I get a slightly different impression
than I did from the old paragraph (which is likely something you
indend), viz., that it's about what could be called "the mitigation
action lifecycle", the entire process from identification of the problem
to verification that it has been mitigated, rather than just the
*action* of mitigating the traffic problem. Within that broader
context, the importance of monitoring is obvious.
3.1.4. More Demand to Control NSFs Dynamically
The Security Service Providers ...
The capitalization of "security service providers" is inconsistent.
Some times all three words are capitalized (in 3.1.2, 3.1.4, and 4), and
some times they're not (two places in 3).
Sue: Thank you for catching this. I moved all of these words to small case
except in titles.
I overlooked (ugh) that there's an instance in section 2:
Security Service Provider: A provider of security services to the
customers (end-users or enterprises) using NSF equipment purchased
from vendors or created by the service provider.
It turns out that there are only 2 multi-word terms defined in section
2 where the later words aren't acronyms, which are the terms whose
capitalization should be consistent. The other one is:
Bespoke security management: Security management which is made to
fit a particular customer.
Dale