Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-rosen-rfcefdp-update-2026-01

Request Review of draft-rosen-rfcefdp-update-2026
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 02)
Type Last Call Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2022-03-07
Requested 2022-02-09
Requested by Lars Eggert
Authors Brian Rosen
I-D last updated 2022-02-09
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -01 by Magnus Nyström (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -01 by Thomas Fossati (diff)
Intdir Last Call review of -01 by Wassim Haddad (diff)
Iotdir Last Call review of -01 by Ines Robles (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -01 by Dr. Bernard D. Aboba (diff)
We're trying to maximize the reviews for documents associated with the change in the RFC Editor model. Hence the request to review these pretty short documents, even though they may not need a review from a technical perspective.
Assignment Reviewer Dr. Bernard D. Aboba
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-rosen-rfcefdp-update-2026 by Transport Area Review Team Assigned
Posted at
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 02)
Result Almost ready
Completed 2022-02-09
This document has been reviewed as part of the transport area review team's
ongoing effort to review key IETF documents. These comments were written
primarily for the transport area directors, but are copied to the document's
authors and WG to allow them to address any issues raised and also to the IETF
discussion list for information.

When done at the time of IETF Last Call, the authors should consider this
review as part of the last-call comments they receive. Please always CC if you reply to or forward this review.

This document updates RFC 2026 so as to be compatible with the proposed
RFC Editor Model v3.

This document has no transport-related implications.


"It no " -> "It is no"

Given that  [I-D.iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model] provides the justification for the
change to RFC 2026, it seems like it should be a normative rather than an
informative reference.