Document: draft-gellens-submit-bis-01.txt Review: Spencer Dawkins Date: 28 februari 2005 This draft is just a little too rough for publication as Draft Standard in its current form, although it's close. Pardon what may be my ownconfusion: - There are "Note:" paragraphs that I would assume were NOT normative, but that contain 2119 normative requirements language ("SHOULD", etc.). If they are normative, I'd lose the "Note:", otherwise I'd lose the all-caps language. - In 5.1, I don't get "If the MSA examines or alters the message text in way,". At a minimum there seems to be a missing "any",but I wasn't sure what my reconstructed sentence was actually saying.I'm not sure why "or alters" is necessary (surely one examines messages before altering them). Got clue? Minor nits: - "SMTP" isn't expanded on first use (I don't believe it's expanded in the document). Neither is POP or IMAP4. - "the prevalenceof malware which turns end-user systems into spam-spewing menaces" is wonderfully purple prose (I talk like this, too), but not wonderfully clear technical writing. I can't imagine many peopleunderstanding this clearly text in 10-20 years. Ata minimum, a reference would help. - There is no reference or explanation for "split-MUA model".