Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-18

Request Review of draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 20)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2013-12-23
Requested 2013-11-25
Authors Michael Montemurro , Andrew Allen , David McDonald , Paul Gosden
I-D last updated 2014-01-20
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -16 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -18 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Alexey Melnikov
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 18 (document currently at 20)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2014-01-20
On 17/09/2013 17:15, Andrew Allen wrote:


Thank you for the review.

My responses below prepended with [AA]


-----Original Message-----
From: Alexey Melnikov [


Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 6:56 AM
To: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn.all at
Cc: <gen-art at> Team
Subject: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16

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

Document:  draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 2013-08-08
IETF LC End Date: 2013-08-16

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational document (with

Major issues:

-- None

Minor issues:

In 3.1:

Rules for Lexical Equivalence:
        Two GSMA IMEI URNs are equivalent if they have the same "imeival"
        value, and the same gsma-specifier-params values in the same
        sequential order, with the exception that the gsma-specifier-param
        "vers=0" is to be ignored for the purposes of comparison.  All of
        these comparisons are to be case-insensitive.

        Any identifier in GSMA namespaces can be compared using the normal
        mechanisms for percent-encoded UTF-8 strings.

UTF-8 reference (RFC 3629) is missing here.

[AA] Will add the RFC 3629 reference

In -19 I see:

3.  Namespace Registration Template

   Rules for Lexical Equivalence:

      Any identifier in 'gsma' NSS can be compared using the normal
      mechanisms for percent-encoded UTF-8 strings (see RFC 3629 [10]) .

The reference should be [8], not [10]. This just demonstrates why

numeric references are a bad idea ;-).

A minor point:

10.2.  Informative references

     [8]   Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
           Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.

This reference is Normative, because it is required to be understood in order
to interpret ABNF syntax.

[AA] As indicated in an earlier response I will make this normative