Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05

Request Review of draft-farrresnickel-harassment
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-02-13
Requested 2015-01-22
Authors Pete Resnick , Adrian Farrel
I-D last updated 2015-02-02
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Magnus Nystrom (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Ron Bonica (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Tom Taylor
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-farrresnickel-harassment by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 10)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2015-02-02
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-farrresnickel-harassment-05
Reviewer: Tom Taylor
Review Date: 2015/02/02
IETF LC End Date:2015/02/13
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary: This document is ready to go with minor editorial issues.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

The Ombudsteam is taken for granted from Section 2 onwards. It would be 

nice to mention in the Introduction that the IESG mentioned 

Ombudspersons in its statement of anti-harassment policy [1], but did 

not define the procedures under which the Ombudsteam would be 

constituted and under which they would operate. This document remedies 

that lack.

Reference URIs [1] and [2] are identical. Should one be removed?

Presumably the Ombudsteam web site will be set up upon approval of this 

document -- it does not exist at the moment.

Section 4.1, first paragraph, fourth line: s/objection/objections/