Last Call Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02
review-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02-genart-lc-melnikov-2015-02-13-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry
Requested rev. 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
Other Reviews 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)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Alexey Melnikov
Review review-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02-genart-lc-melnikov-2015-02-13
Posted at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11323.html
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 06)
Review result Ready with Issues
Draft last updated 2015-02-13
Review completed: 2015-02-13

Review
review-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02-genart-lc-melnikov-2015-02-13

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-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       entry is obsolete, the status field of the obsoleted entry should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: