Re: [apps-review] Reminder: Request for review: draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-06

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 19 April 2011 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: apps-review@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1499E077A for <apps-review@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.187
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.187 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.588, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N+zeUjMkBJzk for <apps-review@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E9815E06BE for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 08:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2011 15:55:37 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.148]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp044) with SMTP; 19 Apr 2011 17:55:37 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19/U/tUbMl/yyXqbyE194/vfNvT4Lz4juKoTZrBTu fERakLhVhgPGBP
Message-ID: <4DADB072.1070407@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:55:30 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110418082126.068b9698@elandnews.com> <4DAD4EBC.70306@gmx.de> <6.2.5.6.2.20110419021838.02792648@elandnews.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110419021838.02792648@elandnews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: apps-review@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Reminder: Request for review: draft-ietf-dime-extended-naptr-06
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:55:40 -0000

On 19.04.2011 11:36, SM wrote:
> Hi Julian, Joseph,
> At 01:58 19-04-2011, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> I can do a fully mechanical check (ABNF, references, keywords, etc),
>> but I do not have *any* knowledge about the technical matter. I'll do
>> what I can today, but maybe somebody else can take over with the
>> remainder?
>
> Can you do the mechanical checks?

Done.

All I have is:

-- snip --
Editorial:

        iana-registered-service = aaa-service / ALPHA *31ALPHANUMSYM
        aaa-service             = "aaa+ap" appln-id
        appln-id                = DIGIT *DIGIT
                                  ; Application identifier expressed as a
                                  ; decimal integer.

1) Is "aaa+ap" case-insensitive? (That's the ABNF default for string 
literals)

2) Maybe "1*DIGIT" instead of "DIGIT *DIGIT"?

        iana-registered-protocol = aaa-protocol / ALPHA *31ALPHANUMSYM
        aaa-protocol             = "diameter." aaa-transport
        aaa-transport            = "tcp" / "sctp" / "tls.tcp"

(see above re case-sensitity)
-- snip --

(the ABNF and the references seem to be ok, but as I said; I really did 
only a mechanical check).

> Joseph, can you do the rest of the review? I would have done the DDDS
> part if I had the time over the next few days. If you don't have the
> time, I'll do it as it is less effort than finding another reviewer for
> the assignment.
>
> I suggest that you do a joint review if both of you accept the assignment.

Best regards, Julian