Telechat Review of draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21
review-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21-dnsdir-telechat-gieben-2022-10-14-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 24) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | DNS Directorate (dnsdir) | |
Deadline | 2022-10-18 | |
Requested | 2022-10-04 | |
Authors | Daniel Migault , Ralf Weber , Tomek Mrugalski | |
I-D last updated | 2022-10-14 | |
Completed reviews |
Opsdir Last Call review of -20
by Al Morton
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -21 by Ines Robles (diff) Artart Last Call review of -21 by Bron Gondwana (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -21 by Hilarie Orman (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -21 by Al Morton (diff) Dnsdir Telechat review of -21 by R. (Miek) Gieben (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | R. (Miek) Gieben |
State | Completed Snapshot | |
Review |
review-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21-dnsdir-telechat-gieben-2022-10-14
|
|
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsdir/URuObx2sodOATOXl_JmDeeGZwns | |
Reviewed revision | 21 (document currently at 24) | |
Result | Ready w/nits | |
Completed | 2022-10-14 |
review-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-21-dnsdir-telechat-gieben-2022-10-14-00
A straight forward document specifying dhcpv6 options, had little trouble reading it. Got a bit lost with acronyms though, i.e. forgetting what ORO is when nearing the end of the document. Any reason why DNS over HTTP (DoH, RFC 8484) isn't standardized in the same document? A Nit (maybe): in section 4.2: "... defined by standard." -> "... defined by standard action" ?