Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types-11: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # GEN AD review of draft-ietf-emu-tls-eap-types-11 CC @larseggert Thanks to Thomas Fossati for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/fNZOEID38s07l1DnsrSiqNpoXBc). ## Comments ### Boilerplate Document boilerplate does not indicate intended status? TLP Section 6.a "Submission Compliance for Internet-Drafts" boilerplate text seems to have issues. I-D Guidelines boilerplate text seems to have issues. TLP Section 6.b "Copyright and License Notice" boilerplate text seems to have issues. ## Nits All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. ### Boilerplate Document still refers to the "Simplified BSD License", which was corrected in the TLP on September 21, 2021. It should instead refer to the "Revised BSD License". ### Grammar/style #### Section 2.3, paragraph 5 ``` llenge = TLS-Exporter("ttls challenge",, n) There is no "context_value" ([RFC ^^ ``` Two consecutive commas. #### Section 3.1, paragraph 8 ``` tity can then be fully qualified: user name plus realm of the organization. ^^^^^^^^^ ``` It's more common nowadays to write this noun as one word. #### Section 4, paragraph 2 ``` e implemented and tested to be inter-operable with wpa_supplicant 2.10 and W ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` This word is normally spelled as one. #### Section 6.1, paragraph 8 ``` e Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March, 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/inf ^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` When specifying a month and year, the comma is unnecessary. #### Section 6.1, paragraph 9 ``` 0, May 2014. [RFC8126] Cotton, M., et al, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Co ^^^^^ ``` A period is misplaced or missing. (Should be "et al."; also elsewhere.) ## Notes This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT]. [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments [IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
