Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-calext-availability-01
review-ietf-calext-availability-01-opsdir-lc-wu-2016-07-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-calext-availability
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2016-07-05
Requested 2016-06-29
Authors Cyrus Daboo , Michael Douglass
Draft last updated 2016-07-11
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -04 by Christer Holmberg
Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Dan Harkins (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -01 by Qin Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Qin Wu
State Completed
Review review-ietf-calext-availability-01-opsdir-lc-wu-2016-07-11
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 04)
Result Has Nits
Completed 2016-07-11
review-ietf-calext-availability-01-opsdir-lc-wu-2016-07-11-00

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational
 aspects of the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may
 be included in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG
 chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.



This document proposes a new iCalendar calendar component that allows the
publication of available and unavailable time periods associated with a
calendar user and further extends
 CalDAV calendar-access and calendar-auto-schedule

 to allow free-busy looksup to use the information from the new iCalendar
 availability components.

I think this document is ready for publication. Here are a few editorial
comments:



1.



Paragraph 4,5 of section 1:

Is Update to RFC4791 required when you introduce an extension to CALDAV
calendar-acess and CALDAV calendar-auto-schedule features?

Can new iCalendar availability component work together with VERFY component? Or
They are exclusive.



2

.

Section 4

How VALAILABILITY component works together with VERYBUSY component? It looks
the section 3 is about how one VAVAILABILITY component works together with
another VAVAILABILITY component while the section 5 is about one
 VAVAILABILITY component works together with other component? Would you like to
 make this clear in the section title or in the texts of each section.



3. Last paragraph of section 4

Since the range for priority property value is {0,9~1}, spacing out method
doesn’t looks scalable suppose you have 20 components that need to be ordered
by priority.



Is there any default priority difference between two intersecting component
with different priority value? In your example, it seems you choose 2?



4. The 3

rd

 paragraph of section 5

s/ first available time /first the available time



5.Example procedure in the section 5

Suggest to move all the example to one place .e.g., appendix A since it is hard
to understand when some example snippet in one place and other example snippet
in the appendix.



6. Section 5, step 2 of example procedure said:

“

Append the "VAVAILABILITY" component to a list of components

           for further processing in step 3, if it has not been ignored.

”

Step 3 is confusing, since the example procedure has a third step, in the
second step, there is also a 3rd step. Suggest change 4 steps in the step 2
into sub step such as step 2.1, step 2.2, step 2.3, step 2.4 Then
 you will clear the confusing step 3 in the step 2 with step 3 in the example
 procedure.



7. Section 5, the first paragraph said:

“

In the examples below a table is used to represent time slots for the

   period of a free-busy request.

”

There are two tables in the section 5.1, which table are you referred to? I
believe it is the second table, I would suggest to add a number and title for
each table and then you can reference table number to clear
 the confusing introduced here.



8. Section 5.1.2

Would you like to generate a similar table as one in the section 5.1.1?



9. Section 7.1 said:

“

"VAVAILABILITY" components are treated in a manner similar to

   "VEVENT" and "VTODO" components,

”

How VENET and VTDO component are treated? In which way? Can you provide a
reference which discuss how VEVENT component is treated?



-Qin