Last Call Review of draft-ietf-precis-mappings-11
review-ietf-precis-mappings-11-opsdir-lc-jethanandani-2015-09-01-00

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.

Document reviewed:  draft-ietf-precis-mappings-11

Status:

Ready with nits

Summary:

This document provides guidelines for authors of protocol profiles of the
PRECIS framework and describes several mappings that can be applied between
receiving user input and passing permitted code points to internationalized
protocols.

The document is informational and does not define something that needs an
operational or management review. However, the following nits need to be
addressed in the document.

  Checking nits according to

http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist

 :

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  ** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the

     recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119

     keywords.

     RFC 2119 keyword, line 200: '...mework (i.e., It is RECOMMENDED to use...'

  Miscellaneous warnings:

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  -- Found something which looks like a code comment -- if you have code

     sections in the document, please surround them with '<CODE BEGINS>' and

     '<CODE ENDS>' lines.

  Checking references for intended status: Informational

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  == Missing Reference: 'I-D.ietf-precis-framework' is mentioned on line 523,

     but not defined

  == Unused Reference: 'Casefolding' is defined on line 262, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC3454' is defined on line 275, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC3490' is defined on line 279, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC3491' is defined on line 283, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC3722' is defined on line 287, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC6122' is defined on line 311, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  == Unused Reference: 'RFC6885' is defined on line 314, but no explicit

     reference was found in the text

  -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3454

     (Obsoleted by RFC 7564)

  -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3490

     (Obsoleted by RFC 5890, RFC 5891)

  -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3491

     (Obsoleted by RFC 5891)

     Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 8 warnings (==), 5 comments (--).

Mahesh Jethanandani

mjethanandani at gmail.com