Last Call Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03
review-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03-opsdir-lc-banks-2014-10-24-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 04) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2014-10-14 | |
| Requested | 2014-09-19 | |
| Authors | Murray Kucherawy | |
| I-D last updated | 2014-10-24 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -03
by Russ Housley
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -04 by Russ Housley Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Sarah Banks (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Sarah Banks |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 03 (document currently at 04) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2014-10-24 |
review-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03-opsdir-lc-banks-2014-10-24-00
Hello,
While a little late in the review, I have no objection or nits to this
draft; I think it's well written, it's problem is clearly defined, and
it ties the link between RFC 7001 that it wants to update, with the
next steps 9for the update). One comment I'd make though, is that it'd
have been nice to have an example ptype, that demonstrates the
need/want for the updates/loosening of restrictions on ptypes in the
first place. That's minor though, and for readability once published.
Kind regards,
Sarah