Document:   draft-ietf-secsh-break-04
Reviewer: Elwyn Davies [elwynd@dial.pipex.com]
Review Date:  Tuesday 8/30/2005 9:29 AM
Telechat Date:  9/01/2005

Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as a proposed 
standard but it has one possible (minor) issue and a couple of editorial nits.

Possible issue:
---------------
[I say 'possible' because I am not an ssh expert but there is an 
apparent inconsistency with other ssh documents which makes me wonder].
s2: para 4: The text says 'If the BREAK-length parameter is 0 *or not 
present*, the BREAK SHOULD be interpreted...'. As far as I can see no 
other ssh message has optional parameters in this way. Although it would 
obviously be possible to cope with both cases, it seems to be unusual 
and makes parsing the message more complex than it needs to be, given 
that this message is going to be a relative rarity. Was this intended? 
If so I think it would be desirable to add an explicit note closer to 
the message definition to point out that the parameter is optional. 
Otherwise just delete 'or not present'.

Editorial:
----------
s1: para 1: Add a reference to the SSH Connection protocol [5] after 
'session channel'.
s3: Choose between 'break-length' (as in message format) and 
'BREAK-length' (as in para 4).
s3: next to last para: (2 places) s/preformed/performed/