Last Call Review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02
review-murdock-nato-nid-02-genart-lc-romascanu-2014-11-19-00

Request Review of draft-murdock-nato-nid
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2014-11-19
Requested 2014-10-23
Authors Aidan Murdock
Draft last updated 2014-11-19
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -02 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Ben Laurie (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Tina Tsou (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Dan Romascanu 
State Completed Snapshot
Review review-murdock-nato-nid-02-genart-lc-romascanu-2014-11-19
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 03)
Review result Almost Ready
Review completed: 2014-11-19

Review
review-murdock-nato-nid-02-genart-lc-romascanu-2014-11-19






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-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt




Reviewer: Dan Romascanu




Review Date: 11/19/14




IETF LC End Date: 11/19/14




IESG Telechat date: 11/25/14




 




Summary: Almost Ready




 




Major issues:




 







1.

      


The document does not expand the acronym NATO at the first occurrence. Moreover, in section 7 it mentions ‘

that a standards body, like NATO’ which is misleading – as NATO is not a
 standards body. I suggest to use the full name in the title and abstract, expand the acronym at first occurrence and correct the text in Section 7.








2.

      


The abstract and introduction should make clear that this is a request made according to RFC 3406 for a formal URN space type, as described in Section 4.3 of RFC 3406.








3.

      


As per RFC 3406, section 4.3: 







 




Ø

 


   The proposed template




Ø

 


   should be sent to the:




Ø

 


 




Ø

 


      urn-nid at apps.ietf.org




Ø

  

   mailing list to allow for a two week discussion period for clarifying




Ø

  

   the _expression_ of the registration information, before the IESG




Ø

  

   reviews the document.







Ø

 


 




 




I could not find in the summary written by the AD shepherd an indication whether this review occurred.





 




Minor issues:




 




Nits/editorial comments: