Last Call Review of draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-
|Requested revision||No specific revision (document currently at 08)|
|Type||Last Call Review|
|Team||General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)|
|Authors||Tony Hansen , Alexey Melnikov|
|I-D last updated||2012-10-16|
Genart Last Call review of -??
by Martin Thomson
|Request||Last Call review on draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned|
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-06 Reviewer: Martin Thomson Review Date: 2012-10-16 IETF LC End Date: 2012-10-19 IESG Telechat date: 2012-10-25 Summary: This document is ready for publication as a (?) RFC. Minor issues: Is BCP status really appropriate? Informational seems more appropriate for this sort of document. The choice of providing a modicum of guidance in Section 2, as opposed to in the RFC that establishes the registry, could suggest this status, but that seems a bit weak as motivation. Nits: +der doesn't even make a passing reference to +ber. That's odd, since one describes a subset of the other. Mention of schema for +der and +ber doesn't seem relevant to the key security consideration: that structures can be nested indefinitely. This is possible regardless of what the schema says - a generic processor is more likely to fall victim in that regard.