Last Call Review of draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02
review-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02-genart-lc-sparks-2019-11-26-00
| Request | Review of | draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 03) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2019-12-16 | |
| Requested | 2019-11-18 | |
| Authors | Mark Nottingham | |
| I-D last updated | 2020-06-30 (Latest revision 2020-01-05) | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -02
by Qin Wu
(diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -02 by Robert Sparks (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -02 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff) Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -02 by Dr. Joseph D. Touch (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Robert Sparks |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/wRKBioW78JuFE2tmKiYxcz3JXHI | |
| Reviewed revision | 02 (document currently at 03) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2019-11-26 |
review-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02-genart-lc-sparks-2019-11-26-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02 Reviewer: Robert Sparks Review Date: 2019-11-26 IETF LC End Date: 2019-12-16 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Ready for publication as a BCP but with nits to consider during the approval process Nits: Neither the document nor the shepherds write-up acknowledge or explain the replacement of RFC6838 with RFC3986 for a reference for specifying fragment identifier syntax and semantics (hence dropping the reference to 6838). It would be nice to have something captured in the record that supports/explains this change. Near that change, there is a typo, currently saying "fragment identiers' syntax" (should be "identifiers'") It might be good to capture in the "Note to Readers" that the RFC Editor should also remove Section 6.3 (URIs) since all the references to them will be removed with the removal of this Note.