Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis-32
review-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis-32-opsdir-lc-wicinski-2024-10-25-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 42)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2024-11-01
Requested 2024-10-11
Requested by Murray Kucherawy
Authors Dr. John C. Klensin
I-D last updated 2025-04-17 (Latest revision 2025-03-18)
Completed reviews Secdir IETF Last Call review of -31 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Dnsdir IETF Last Call review of -31 by Ted Lemon (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -32 by Tim Wicinski (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -35 by Vijay K. Gurbani (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -38 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -42 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd
Comments
Prior Last Call review for the selected directorates show "Assigned" and are past due (Last Call ended 10/10 and no review appeared), so issuing fresh requests.
Assignment Reviewer Tim Wicinski
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/N59MwZVp4XG8Y52DzmR4QPp3CEA
Reviewed revision 32 (document currently at 42)
Result Ready
Completed 2024-10-25
review-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis-32-opsdir-lc-wicinski-2024-10-25-00
All

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 is the underlying specification in electronic mail and its
movement across the internet.

I actually reviewed this document during the working group last call process,
and worked through several comments John L and John K addressed then.

I have been also following the DNSDIR review thread, and feel confident the are
addressing those issues to me satisfaction.

One Nit:

The acknowledgement section has this partial paragraph - some bad xml?

    chetti contributed an analysis that clarified the ABNF productions
    that implicitly reference other documents.