Telechat Review of draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-03
review-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-03-genart-telechat-black-2012-08-24-00
| Request | Review of | draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 03) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2012-08-28 | |
| Requested | 2012-08-16 | |
| Authors | Michelle Cotton , Leo Vegoda | |
| Draft last updated | 2012-08-24 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -02
by
David L. Black
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -03 by David L. Black Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Joseph A. Salowey |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | David L. Black |
| State | Completed Snapshot | |
| Review |
review-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-03-genart-telechat-black-2012-08-24
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 03 | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2012-08-24 |
review-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-03-genart-telechat-black-2012-08-24-00
The -03 version of this draft addresses the nits in the Gen-ART version of the -02 version. Section 5 has been removed in the -03 version, so the nit that was there is gone. Thanks, --David > -----Original Message----- > From: Black, David > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 7:05 PM > To: michelle.cotton at icann.org; leo.vegoda at icann.org; gen-art at ietf.org > Cc: Black, David; ietf at ietf.org > Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-02 > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, > please > see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may > receive. > > Document: draft-vegoda-cotton-rfc5735bis-02 > Reviewer: David L. Black > Review Date: August 9, 2012 > IETF LC End Date: August 9, 2012 > > Summary: > This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that > should be fixed before publication. > > This draft provides an updated list of the special use IPv4 address blocks > that have been allocated by IANA along with explanations of their special > uses. > > I found one nit and idnits found another one. > > Section 5 - the first sentence in the second paragraph is: > > The domain name and IP address spaces involve policy issues (in > addition to technical issues) so that the requirements of [RFC2860] > do not apply generally to those spaces. > > I'm surprised by "do not apply generally". I would have expected that > the policy issues create requirements and constraints above and beyond > the requirements in RFC 2860 as opposed to replacing those requirements. > > idnits 2.12.13 complained about a lot of IP addresses that aren't in > the address ranges used for examples. These complaints can be ignored, > but idnits did find one actual nit: > > == Unused Reference: 'RFC6441' is defined on line 346, but no explicit > reference was found in the text > > Thanks, > --David > ---------------------------------------------------- > David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer > EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 > +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 > david.black at emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 > ---------------------------------------------------- >