Last Call Review of draft-leiba-5322upd-from-group-
review-leiba-5322upd-from-group-genart-lc-even-2012-10-26-00
| Request | Review of | draft-leiba-5322upd-from-group |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2012-11-08 | |
| Requested | 2012-10-11 | |
| Authors | Barry Leiba | |
| I-D last updated | 2012-10-26 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -??
by Roni Even
Genart Telechat review of -?? by Roni Even Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Warren "Ace" Kumari |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Roni Even |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-leiba-5322upd-from-group by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2012-10-26 |
review-leiba-5322upd-from-group-genart-lc-even-2012-10-26-00
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-leiba-5322upd-from-group-06 Reviewer: Roni Even Review Date:2012–10–17 IETF LC End Date: 2012–11–6 IESG Telechat date: Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a standard track RFC . Major issues: Minor issues: It is not clear from the draft what the use case for using the group construct is. Section 3 talks about the issues with using the group construct and recommend limited use, but this is the only information. Section 2.1 says “If the sender field uses group syntax, the group MUST NOT contains more than one mailbox.” Why use a group name for a single mailbox? Nits/editorial comments: