Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02
review-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02-opsdir-lc-wu-2019-11-28-00

Request Review of draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2019-12-16
Requested 2019-11-18
Authors Mark Nottingham
I-D last updated 2019-11-28
Completed reviews Opsdir Last Call review of -02 by Qin Wu (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -02 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -02 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -02 by Dr. Joseph D. Touch (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Qin Wu
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-nottingham-rfc7320bis by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/N47HHkojbwsZyWvYcljqGyPCPKU
Reviewed revision 02 (document currently at 03)
Result Ready
Completed 2019-11-28
review-nottingham-rfc7320bis-02-opsdir-lc-wu-2019-11-28-00
This document provides a good guidance on the specification of URI 
substructure in standards. One key value of this document is to remove
constraints upon the structure of URIs and provide best current practice on how
to specify structure and semantics within URIs. I believe it is ready for
publication.

Major issue:
Not found

Minor issue:
I am curious why this bis document is not published through WG process but
through individual stream process. If this document is published through
individual steam process with AD sponsored, should this document be classified
as informational? Where was this document initially discussed to build IETF
consensus? In which WG? Is removing constraints on the structure of URIs
causing a lot of debate, e.g., the following constraints relaxation: “ Note
that this does not apply to Applications defining a structure of URIs paths
"under" a resource under control of the server.  Because the prefix is under
control of the party deploying the application, collisions and rigidity are
avoided, and the risk of erroneous client assumptions is reduced. ” Try to look
into the history of the relevant discussion.