Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02

Request Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-02-16
Requested 2015-02-04
Authors David Quigley , Jarrett Lu , Thomas Haynes
Draft last updated 2015-02-13
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -04 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Dacheng Zhang (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Alexey Melnikov
State Completed
Review review-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02-genart-lc-melnikov-2015-02-13
Reviewed revision 02 (document currently at 06)
Result Ready with Issues
Completed 2015-02-13
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on 

Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at 


Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments 

you may receive.

Document:  draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 2015-02-11
IETF LC End Date: 2015-02-16
IESG Telechat date: N/A.

Summary: This draft is nearly ready for publication as a standard track 

RFC (with nits).

Major issues:
Minor issues:

In Section 4:

"LSF" is used for the first time without being expanded. I suggest you 

introduce the abbreviation in the terminology section.

In Section 5:

Label Description: - what is the allowed character set for this field? 

Is it ASCII? Is it UTF-8 with some restrictions?

>Status:  A short ASCII text string indicating the status of an entry
>       in the registry.  The status field for most entries should have
>       the value "active".  In the case that a label format selection
>       entry is obsolete, the status field of the obsoleted entry should
>       be "obsoleted by entry NNN".

What is entry NNN? Is it a document reference (e.g. An RFC)? Is it 

possible to obsolete without such entry?

In Section 5.3 - is it possible to update a label description document 

without requesting a new label? For example if changes are editorial and 

don't significantly affect label syntax and model.

Nits/editorial comments: