Telechat Review of draft-ietf-httpapi-link-template-03
review-ietf-httpapi-link-template-03-opsdir-telechat-dhody-2024-02-14-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-httpapi-link-template
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Telechat Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2024-02-13
Requested 2024-01-31
Authors Mark Nottingham
I-D last updated 2024-02-14
Completed reviews Opsdir Telechat review of -03 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -02 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Radia Perlman (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Dhruv Dhody
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-httpapi-link-template by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/Ay47A_AFQ-oHr6_IdST1GwoMnJQ
Reviewed revision 03 (document currently at 04)
Result Ready
Completed 2024-02-14
review-ietf-httpapi-link-template-03-opsdir-telechat-dhody-2024-02-14-00
Reviewer: Dhruv Dhody
Review Result: Ready

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 defines a new HTTP header field, the "Link-Template". I don't
think this new field creates new operational issues.

Just a few suggestions -

- I wish the document had more background information on why this header field
is needed.

- Referencing RFCs - consider using the [RFCXXXX] style, currently, it is a mix
of [STRING] and [RFCXXXX]. BTW
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7322.html#section-4.8.6.2 says you should use
[RFCXXXX] style.

Thanks!
Dhruv