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-melnikov-smtp-priority-09 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:2012–3–13 IETF LC End Date: 2012–3–28 IESG Telechat date:   Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC .   Major issues:   Minor issues:   1.        In section 4.2  “In absence of both the MT-PRIORITY MAIL FROM parameter  and the MT-Priority header field, other message header fields, such  as Priority [RFC2156] and X-Priority, MAY be used for determining the  priority under this "Priority Message Handling" SMTP extension.” .      My understanding  from the third bullet in this section is that for this case the message priority is “0” so I am not clear what this sentence means and why is there a  difference if the MT-PRIORITY or MT-Priority values do exist with regards to “Priority” and “X-Priority” for this case. 2.        In section 8 “MT-PRIORITY=3”. I did not see where the MT-PRIORITY SMTP  extension is specified and has the syntax of using “=” before the value.     Nits/editorial comments:   1.        MUA is used in section 1 but expanded only in section 5. 2.        Some typos in section 5. “ syntatically – syntactically” “prioritiy – priority” “comminicate – communicate” “contraints –constraints” 3.        In section 10 for X.3.TBD3 “Description:  The message mas accepted” I assume you meant “was” 4.        In section D.2 first paragraph some typos “focusses –focuses” “comparision – comparison”