Telechat Review of draft-ietf-dots-architecture-16
review-ietf-dots-architecture-16-genart-telechat-kyzivat-2020-01-31-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-dots-architecture |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 18) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2020-02-04 | |
| Requested | 2020-01-30 | |
| Authors | Andrew Mortensen , Tirumaleswar Reddy.K , Flemming Andreasen , Nik Teague , Rich Compton | |
| I-D last updated | 2020-01-31 | |
| Completed reviews |
Tsvart Last Call review of -15
by Michael Tüxen
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -15 by Paul Kyzivat (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -15 by Joe Clarke (diff) Genart Telechat review of -16 by Paul Kyzivat (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Paul Kyzivat |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-dots-architecture by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/W56PakmhtdpePkOySPdZLn89ji0 | |
| Reviewed revision | 16 (document currently at 18) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2020-01-31 |
review-ietf-dots-architecture-16-genart-telechat-kyzivat-2020-01-31-00
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 wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-dots-architecture-16 Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat Review Date: 2020-01-31 IETF LC End Date: 2019-01-31 IESG Telechat date: 2020-02-04 This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be fixed before publication. Thank you for fixing the issues I reported in the last call review. Only one nit remains. IdNits reports: == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). There is one other reported nit (obsolete reference). It is bogus because it is intended.