Last Call Review of draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02
review-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02-genart-lc-holmberg-2024-08-08-00

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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2024-08-08
IETF LC End Date: 2024-09-04
IESG Telechat date: 2024-09-05

Summary: The document is short, easy to read, only describes the transfer of
work, and is almost ready for publication. However, I have a few editorial
comments and questions that I'd like the authors to address.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues: N/A

Nits/editorial comments:

Abstract:
---------

Q_A_1:

The text says:

"This document transfers the ongoing maintenance and further development of the
protocol to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group."

I assume the transfer has already been done, and the document only reflects
that transfer by updating RFC8110. Could one simply say:

"The ongoing maintenance and further development of the protocol has been
transferred to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group."

...followed by the "This document updates RFC8110..." paragraph.

Section 1:
----------

Q_1_1:

Can "IEEE Std 802.11" be replaced with "[IEEE_802.11]", for consistency?

Q_1_2:

The text says:

"Since publication, [RFC8110] (also known as "[Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open]") has been
widely implemented and deployed."

It is unclear what "also known as" means, as we are talking about publications.
Is [Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open] a copy of RFC8110? If so, could one say "also
published as [Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open]"?

Q_1_3:

Not sure what is meant by the following sentence:

"This document is a concurrence."

Section 2:
----------

Q_2_1:

As the content and future work of 8110 is moved to IEEE, is there a reason why
8110 is not obsoleted?

Q_2_2:

Would it be useful that explicitly clarify that the future work in IEEE will
not update RFC8110, but only the IEEE specification where the protocol will be
transferred.

Section 3:
----------

Q_3_1:

Should the text say that future maintenance and development will apply the
security consideration processes of IEEE?