Skip to main content

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
> ----------------------------------------------------
>