Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-melnikov-smtp-priority-tunneling-02

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 11:10:01 +0100

Hi Joseph,
Thank you for the review and sorry for the late response.

On 22/06/2012 22:48, Joseph Yee wrote:
> I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for
> this draft (for background on appsdir, please see
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate
> ).
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
> or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
>
> Document: draft-melnikov-smtp-priority-tunneling-02
> Title: Tunneling of Message Transfer Priorities
> Reviewer: Joseph Yee
> Review Date: 2012-06-22
>
> Summary:
>
>      This draft is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC.
>
> Major Issues:
>
>      none
>
> Minor Issues:
>
>      none
>
> Nits:
>
>      (1)
>          At section 1 Introduction, the text in third paragraph talks
> about unextended MUA in scenario 2, but in the detailed description at
> 5th paragraph, it says "The client is extended via a plugin.....".
> Although the text meant many MUA plugin do not cover SMTP protocol
> features, the word "extended" in detailed description has some
> confusion.  Suggest to change it to "The client is extendable via
> ...."

Thanks, changed.

>      (2)
>          Section 1 Introduction, 3rd paragraph, typo
>          s/scenarious/scenarios/

Fixed, thanks.

>      (3)
>          Several references (Normative References) were not used.
> Although some textes "touched" keywords like 'MSA', it did not cite
> specific rules or concepts.  So either add the reference back in text
> or remove the references work, IMHO.
>          - [RFC2034]
>          - [RFC5321]
>          - [RFC5248]
>          - [RFC6409]

Good point. I will eliminate some of these and will reference the others.