Last Call Review of draft-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02
review-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02-genart-lc-miller-2018-07-31-00

Request Review of draft-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 03)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2018-07-30
Requested 2018-07-02
Authors Shivan Sahib
Draft last updated 2018-07-31
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -01 by Barry Leiba (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -02 by Matthew Miller (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Catherine Meadows
Assignment Reviewer Matthew Miller
State Completed
Review review-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02-genart-lc-miller-2018-07-31
Reviewed rev. 02 (document currently at 03)
Review result Ready with Issues
Review completed: 2018-07-31

Review
review-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02-genart-lc-miller-2018-07-31

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-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02
Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller
Review Date: 2018-07-31
IETF LC End Date: 2018-07-30
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary:

This document is ready to publish as an Informational draft, but
has an issue or two that ought to be addressed before publication.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:

Section 2.2. "Geographical Scope of Block" never states that the
new provisional header field name is "geo-scope-block".
Additionally, an example would be helpful to implementers.

Nits/editorial comments:

* In Section 2.1. "Blocking Authority", it leads with discussion
of a "blocked-by" header; however this is a registered relation type
for a "Link" header value.

* In Section 2.2. "Geographical Scope of Block", there is a missing
preposition "a" between "to" and "comma-separated" in the fragment
"This scope should correspond to comma-separated list ...".

* There are a number of nits that still need to be addressed:

  - RFC5988 (Web Linking) was obsoleted by RFC8288.
  - There are a number of unused references included: RFC2277,
    RFC3986, and RFC8280.