I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document:  draft-jimenez-p2psip-coap-reload-08 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:2015–4-27 IETF LC End Date: 2015–5-13 IESG Telechat date:   Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Standard Track  RFC .     Major issues: Minor issues:       Nits/editorial comments: Some questions about the terminology in section 3 Client – is this different from RFC6940, if not why repeat? Router – this is a different name for a peer? I also noticed that it is used once in the document (defining constrained node) where it does not provide any value Proxy and Proxy node – Why do you need both terms. In section 7 it uses proxy(PN) like it is the same term. Constrained node the last sentence “In the latter case the node is often connected to a  continuous energy power supply” it is not clear what is the latter case, also what type of node is meant. Note that there is a redundant “either a” in the previous sentence.