Editorial comments on draft-ietf-ipcdn-docs-rfmibv2-12.txt

Hi -

Bert asked me to take a look at draft-ietf-ipcdn-docs-rfmibv2-12.txt,
and a few editorial editorial problems jumped out at me.
I have omitted items covered by Bert Wijnen's recent posting.
More technical comments will follow.

1) Period at the end of a sentence should be followed by two
spaces.  The document sometimes uses just one.  A simple
way to find these is the ed/vi expression /\. [^ ]/
Though the rfc editor can fix these, you may find that that
will making checking for errors harder in the AUTH48 period.

2) Abbreviations and acronyms should be spelled out on first
use.  Presumably this includes DOCSIS in the title.  Others:
    CATV (though explained in the next paragraph, so this isn't serious)
    PDU (or is this sufficiently well known?)
    TDMA
    CDMA
    FCS
    PHY
    usec
    msec
    RNG-RSP
    mac (is the all lower-case version distinct?)
    REG-REQ
    TFTP
    dBc
    SP-RFI
    OSSI
    UCD
    RNG-REQ
    DHCP
    REQ
    ETSI
    OSS
    UCC
    SID
    IUC

3) EDITORIAL: "5-42MHZ" would be better as "5-42 MHz", ditto
other uses of "MHz".  (Current text is not consistent; in some
places there isn't a space, in others there is.)

4) EDITORIAL: in section 2, acronym expansions sometimes appear
in the section title (e.g., 2.16 QPSK), while at others in the
text of the section (e.g., 2.18 RF)

5) EDITORIAL: "reinit" -> "reinitialization"

6) EDITORIAL: "ie" -> "i.e.", or better "that is"

7) EDITORIAL: "ipv6" -> "IPv6"

8) EDITORIAL: "and and" -> "and"

9) EDITORIAL: "IPDR" -> "IPR" on page 129

10) EDITORIAL: "Andr?" -> "Andre"

11) EDITORIAL: document layout is odd.  Sometimes there
is no blank line between paragraphs, making it even harder to
read.  Suggest adding them now, rather than relying on the
RFC editor to figure out what you meant, to avoid problems
in AUTH48.  For example, does section 2.9.2 consist of one
ill-formatted paragraph or three?  Another problem is that
some lines clearly end prematurely.  For example, "CMTS to a"
should be in the first line of the paragraph in 2.15.

12) EDITORIAL: "head-end" or "headend"?  pick one, preferably the former.

13) EDITORIAL: there are some strange capitalizations:
"Lineup" in 2.11
"Addressed" in 3.2
"Downstream" in 3.2.5.1 and elsewhere
"Cable" in 3.2.5.1.2
"Unicast" on page 12 & 14 & more
"Multicast" on page 12 & 14 & more
"Broadcast" on page 12 & 14 & more
"Upstream" in 3.2.5.2.1
"Contributions" in 5

14) EDITORIAL: in section 3.1.3, for docIfCmtsCmStatusTable,
is "i.e." really intended, or should it be an "e.g."?  (This could
potentially be a technical issue.)

15) EDITORIAL: "empty string" would be more precise as
"zero length string"  (This could potentially be technical.)

Randy