Last Call Review of draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units-02
review-ietf-core-senml-more-units-02-genart-lc-dunbar-2019-10-31-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-10-30
Requested 2019-10-16
Authors Carsten Bormann
I-D last updated 2019-10-31
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Valery Smyslov (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -05 by Valery Smyslov (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/c2-ooMZRI6IiIPWLB6A-5BX0jEY
Reviewed revision 02 (document currently at 06)
Result Ready
Completed 2019-10-31
review-ietf-core-senml-more-units-02-genart-lc-dunbar-2019-10-31-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-core-senml-more-units-??
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review Date: 2019-10-31
IETF LC End Date: 2019-10-30
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:  The document is very light, describing IANA registration for acronyms
for various UNITs, such as "ms" for Millisecond, "min" for Minute, "kW" for
Kilowatt, etc. While there is no problem of those acronyms, I don't really
understand why it is necessary to have an RFC for this purpose. Many IETF areas
don't even allow Gap Analysis drafts to be published as RFCs.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

Linda Dunbar