ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-hollenbeck-rfc4933bis-02

2009-07-14 10:24:24
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben(_at_)estacado(_dot_)net] 
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 6:23 PM
To: Hollenbeck, Scott; General Area Review Team
Cc: Alexey Melnikov; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-hollenbeck-rfc4933bis-02

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team 
(Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, 
please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD 
before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-hollenbeck-rfc4933bis-02
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 13 July 2009
IESG Telechat date: 16 July 2009

Summary:

The draft is ready for publication. However, I have a couple 
of minor comments about the implementation report at 
http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Implementations/RFCs3730-3734_implem.txt
  that may relate to the progression to draft standard.

(I apologize for not making these comments sooner--this is 
the first progression to draft that I have reviewed, and only 
recently had thoughts on the implementation report.)

Major issues:

None.

Minor issues:


I have a a couple comments about the implementation report. I 
do not necessarily consider them blocking issues; I bring 
them up merely for consideration.

-- The implementation report refers to RFC and draft versions 
that are (at least) a couple of generations old. I assume 
that the authors believe that they also apply to this draft, 
but it would be good to have an explicit assertion of that.

-- It would help to have an explicit assertion whether the 
report author believes the standard meets the requirements to 
progress to draft. I think the report implies a "yes", but it 
leaves the reader to draw that conclusion.

4933bis is a candidate for progression to Standard, not Draft Standard,
as 4933 is already a Draft Standard.  The implementation report was
written as part of the effort to publish 3733bis (which became 4933 in
May 2007) as a Draft Standard.  That's why things appear dated.

-Scott-
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>