Last Call Review of draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00
review-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00-genart-lc-sparks-2014-07-20-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 02)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2014-07-25
Requested 2014-07-03
Authors Les Ginsberg
I-D last updated 2014-07-20
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -00 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -00 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -00 by Carl Wallace (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -00 by Melinda Shore (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Robert Sparks
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 00 (document currently at 02)
Result Ready w/issues
Completed 2014-07-20
review-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00-genart-lc-sparks-2014-07-20-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-isis-tlv-codepoints-00
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 20-Jul-2014
IETF LC End Date: 25-Jul-2014
IESG Telechat date: 7-Aug-2014

Summary: Basically ready for publication, but with process nits for the
group and the IESG to consider

Thanks for assembling such a clearly written document.

The shepherd writeup should have discussed _why_ this document is
intended for Proposed Standard.
There is no protocol definition here, and nothing to progress on the
standards ladder. This is, instead,
primarily defining process. Why isn't this being progressed as a BCP?

Should this Update any of the RFCs that previously defined these registries?