Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-22
review-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-22-artart-lc-leiba-2023-03-14-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 25) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | ART Area Review Team (artart) | |
| Deadline | 2023-04-10 | |
| Requested | 2023-03-13 | |
| Authors | Warren Kumari , Paul E. Hoffman | |
| I-D last updated | 2023-09-14 (Latest revision 2023-05-04) | |
| Completed reviews |
Dnsdir Telechat review of -23
by Vladimír Čunát
(diff)
Dnsdir IETF Last Call review of -22 by Vladimír Čunát (diff) Artart IETF Last Call review of -22 by Barry Leiba (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -22 by Niclas Comstedt (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -22 by Linda Dunbar (diff) Genart IETF Last Call review of -22 by Behcet Sarikaya (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Barry Leiba |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld by ART Area Review Team Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/UlmVsQTqJWbetEPbQAvQVBB951c | |
| Reviewed revision | 22 (document currently at 25) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2023-03-14 |
review-ietf-dnsop-alt-tld-22-artart-lc-leiba-2023-03-14-00
Thanks for a clear, concise, and, if I may say, valuable document. I couldn't even find any typos. I have two very minor comments, both of which can be ignored if you prefer: 1. In Section 4, you use "somename.alt" -- was that chosen over "example.alt" for a particular reason? If so, carry on. If not, maybe consider switching? 2. I would promote RFC 8244 to a normative reference. I realize that one can make a reasonable argument both ways, so no big thing either way. -- Barry