Subject: [eap] Minor editorial comments for 2869bis-09

From: [email-masked] ([email-masked])
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:01:26 +0200

2869bis-09 looks good!
Various minor editorial issues:

---------------
Extended/vendor-specific NAK in 2869bis-09?
Submitter name: Pasi Eronen
Submitter email address: [email-masked]
Date first submitted: 13 Feb 2003
Document: RFC 2869bis-09
Comment type: Editorial
Priority: 2 (May fix)
Section: Various
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

If we add a new "vendor-specific Nak" or "extended Nak" type=20
to 2284bis, we probably have to make some minor editorial
changes in 2869bis as well.

------------
Typos and minor editorial changes for 2869bis-09
Submitter name: Pasi Eronen
Submitter email address: [email-masked]
Date first submitted: 13 Feb 2003
Document: RFC 2869bis-09
Comment type: Editorial
Priority: 2 (May fix)
Section: Various
Rationale/Explanation of issue:

2.1: s/in a a large/in a large/
3.2: s/The is calculated/The Message-Authenticator is calculated/
4.3.1: s/To address this vulnerabilities/To address these =
vulnerabilities/
4.3.7: s/MD5/MD5-Challenge/
4.3.8: s/EAP methode-specific/EAP method-specific/
Appendix A, 2nd example: last message sent by RADIUS server
  s:EAP-Message/EAP-Request/EAP-Success:EAP-Message/EAP-Success:
Appendix A, 3rd, 4th and 7th, 9th examples: first message sent by RADIUS =
server
  s:EAP-Message/Identity:EAP-Message/EAP-Request/Identity:
The informative references [MD5Attack] and [RFC2486] are=20
  never cited anywhere in the text, so maybe they are unnecessary.

Best regards,
Pasi