Last Call Review of draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-07
review-ietf-precis-7700bis-07-genart-lc-housley-2017-05-31-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-precis-7700bis
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-06-13
Requested 2017-05-30
Authors Peter Saint-Andre
Draft last updated 2017-05-31
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -07 by Russ Housley (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -07 by Nevil Brownlee (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Daniel Migault (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -08 by Russ Housley (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Russ Housley
State Completed
Review review-ietf-precis-7700bis-07-genart-lc-housley-2017-05-31
Reviewed rev. 07 (document currently at 10)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2017-05-31

Review
review-ietf-precis-7700bis-07-genart-lc-housley-2017-05-31

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-07
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2017-05-31
IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-13
IESG Telechat date: 2017-07-06

Summary: Ready

Major Concerns: None

Minor Concerns: None

Nits:

Section 2.3 includes this note:

   Note: An entity SHOULD NOT apply the Case Mapping Rule during
   enforcement, because typically it is appropriate only during
   comparison.

I question the inclusion of "typically" in this note.  Can you simply
say that the Case Mapping Rule SHOULD only be used during comparison?