Telechat Review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-08
review-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-08-genart-telechat-romascanu-2016-07-15-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
Deadline | 2016-07-05 | |
Requested | 2016-06-22 | |
Authors | Tobias Heer , Samu Varjonen | |
I-D last updated | 2016-07-15 | |
Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -06
by Dan Romascanu
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -08 by Dan Romascanu (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Sean Turner (diff) Secdir Telechat review of -08 by Sean Turner (diff) Intdir Early review of -05 by Jouni Korhonen (diff) Intdir Early review of -05 by Pascal Thubert (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Qin Wu (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Dan Romascanu |
State | Completed | |
Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 08 (document currently at 09) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2016-07-15 |
review-ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis-08-genart-telechat-romascanu-2016-07-15-00
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 <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-hardy-pdf-mime-02 Reviewer: Dan Romascanu Review Date: 07/07/16 IETF LC End Date: 07/21/16 IESG Telechat date: Summary: Ready. This informational document which obsoletes RFC 3778 provides an overview of the PDF format and updates the media type registration of “application/pdf” by aligning it with RFC 6838. I am no expert in application formats, but the document seems to be well informed and clearly written. A couple of nits generate id-nits warnings (updating RFC 3778 is not mentioned in the Abstract, one unused reference) that can be easily fixed during the RFC Editor processing. Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: