Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended-10
review-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended-10-opsdir-telechat-clarke-2023-10-12-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Telechat Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2023-10-17
Requested 2023-10-11
Authors Ujjwal Sharma , Carsten Bormann
I-D last updated 2023-10-12
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Kyle Rose (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -08 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -10 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Joe Clarke
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/o6qRUAynDHctJfk4zdNY7ZyNkdY
Reviewed revision 10 (document currently at 11)
Result Ready
Completed 2023-10-12
review-ietf-sedate-datetime-extended-10-opsdir-telechat-clarke-2023-10-12-00
The changes between -08 and -10 do add clarity (I especially like the simple
removal of the word "any"), but I still feel something on forward
interoperability would be helpful.  We discussed my LC comments in email, and I
understand where the authors and WG are coming from: libraries will move at
different velocities, and this format _is_ backwards compatible to 3339. 
Still, it gnaws at me that as people start to use these new modifiers,
portability and interoperability issues will arise that are perhaps worth
noting (given how pervasive 3339 support has become).