Early Review of draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05
review-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05-iotdir-early-sethi-2021-07-26-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-cbor-network-addresses |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | Early Review | |
| Team | Internet of Things Directorate (iotdir) | |
| Deadline | 2021-07-29 | |
| Requested | 2021-07-16 | |
| Requested by | Christian Amsüss | |
| Authors | Michael Richardson , Carsten Bormann | |
| Draft last updated | 2021-07-26 | |
| Completed reviews |
Iotdir Early review of -05
by
Mohit Sethi
(diff)
Opsdir Early review of -05 by Ron Bonica (diff) Genart Last Call review of -08 by Robert Sparks (diff) Intdir Telechat review of -09 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff) |
|
| Comments |
For OpsDir, one question here is whether the terminology for prefixes and address-with-prefix is right. For both (but especially IoTdir), this is also about dissemination and possibly pulling in references to cases where this would be (or could have been) useful. |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Mohit Sethi |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05-iotdir-early-sethi-2021-07-26
|
|
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-directorate/J0QdA3PS6vYIhAZWmVSsquJnh30 | |
| Reviewed revision | 05 (document currently at 13) | |
| Result | Ready with Issues | |
| Completed | 2021-07-26 |
review-ietf-cbor-network-addresses-05-iotdir-early-sethi-2021-07-26-00
In the abstract, perhaps "describes" could be "specifies"/"defines"? It might make sense to provide references to the definition of tags 260 and 261. I had to look them up. "was removed in this specification" -> "is removed in this specification"? "When applied to an array that starts with a number"? Is 'number' the correct terminology? I confused it with the tag number? What would happen to tags 260 and 261. Are they now discouraged/forbidden? Are they meant to co-exist with 52 and 54?