RE: AD review of draft-ietf-ips-iser

IPS WG and iSER Authors,

Let's get a new version of this draft, if for no other reason
than Lars *will* use RFC Editor Notes to put the spelling corrections
into the announcement that goes out to the world when the IESG
approves this draft ;-) ... and the authors should take the fact
that most of what Lars found is spelling and punctuation as a
significant backhanded compliment on the quality of this draft!

The [RDDPSEC] reference should be changed to normative, but the
[DA] reference needs to remain informative as the iSER draft is
supposed to be self-contained, and the DA draft will be published
as Informational.

Make sure the new version passes the idnits checker at:
	http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/
*before* submitting it - an initial run of the checker on the
current draft will indicate what boilerplate updates are needed.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email protected]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars Eggert [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 4:53 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: AD review of draft-ietf-ips-iser
> 
> Hi,
> 
> please find the AD review of draft-ietf-ips-iser-05.txt below. In a  
> nutshell: No major issues but a number of comments and nits.  
> Depending on the amount of changes needed, an RFC Editor Note may be  
> sufficient, or a new revision may be needed.
> 
> Lars
> 
> ---<snip>---
> 
>    Has idnits (unused references, etc.) and boilerplate issues (some
due
>    to boilerplate changes during the too-long AD review - mea culpa).
> 
> 
> INTRODUCTION, paragraph 12:
>  >    Ko et. al.                Expires April  2006
1
> 
>    Nit: s/et./et/ everywhere
> 
> 
> Section 7.3.12, paragraph 3:
>  >    qualified with DataDescriptorReject which defines the Rejct
buffer.
> 
>    Nit: s/Rejct/Reject/
> 
> 
> Section 8.1.1.3, paragraph 3:
>  >    CmdSN of the PDU sent by the intiator in this category is x, the
PDU
> 
>    Nit: s/intiator/initiator/
> 
> 
> Section 8.1.2, paragraph 7:
>  >    (Implementatin note:  SCSI task timeout and recovery can be a
> 
>    Nit: s/Implementatin/Implementation/
> 
> 
> Section 9.1, paragraph 4:
>  >         The Opcode field identifies the type of iSER Messages:
> 
>    Are there IANA actions required for these type codes? IANA 
> section is
>    empty.
> 
> 
> Section 13.2, paragraph 2:
>  >    [DA] M. Chadalapaka et al., "Datamover Architecture for iSCSI",
IETF
>  >        Internet-draft, draft-ietf-ips-da-02.txt (work in progress),
> 
> 
>    Not normative?
> 
>  >    [RDDPSEC] J. Pinkerton et al., "DDP/RDMAP Security", IETF
Internet
>  >        Draft draft-ietf-rddp-security-07.txt (work in progress),
April
>  >        2005
> 
>    Not normative?
> 
> -- 
> Lars Eggert                                     NEC Network 
> Laboratories
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Ips mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ips