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 revision | 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 Kaul Sahib | |
I-D 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 A. Miller (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Catherine Meadows |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Matthew A. Miller |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 02 (document currently at 03) | |
Result | Ready w/issues | |
Completed | 2018-07-31 |
review-sahib-451-new-protocol-elements-02-genart-lc-miller-2018-07-31-00
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-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.