Document: draft-ietf-xcon-ccmp-12.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2011-03-01
IETF LC End Date: 2011-03-04
IESG Telechat date: 

Summary:  Almost ready
--------

Comment:
--------

I have not checked the XML or checked consistency with the data model.


Minor issues
------------

"SOAP was not considered to be general purpose enough for use in a broad range
of
operational environments."

Or you could have written "SOAP was not invented here."

I'm not challenging the WG choice to miss out the SOAP layer. It would have
been
perfectly reasonable to write that SOAP was considered to bring unnecessary
complexity and overhead; but asserting that it isn't general-purpose is, well,
just wrong. 

I could not find a description of what happens if a CCMP response is lost. We
have
the usual lack of transactional integrity that is part of HTTP's design - so
what
happens if a client succeeds in joining a conference but never gets the CCMP
response telling it so? 

Nit
---

  == The document seems to use 'NOT RECOMMENDED' as an RFC 2119 keyword, but
     does not include the phrase in its RFC 2119 key words list.

[Note for the confused: RFC 2119 does define 'NOT RECOMMENDED' but omits it
from
 the sample boilerplate. This has been reported as an erratum. ]