Re: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 - respond by August 8th

[神明達哉 <[e-mail]>]

> From: dhcwg [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Tomek Mrugalski
> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 1:03 PM
> To: dhcwg <[e-mail]>
> Subject: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 - respond by August 8th
>
> Hi all,
>
> So the day finally has come. Authors working on RFC3315bis believe that after over two years of work, this document is ready for working group last call. This call initiates the working group last call on
> draft-ietf-dhc-rfc3315bis-05 [1]. Since this is a large document
> (130+ pages), there's upcoming meeting and a holiday period, chairs
> decided to do an extended last call that will last 4 weeks. Please
> post your comments by August 8th.

[...]

> If you would like to review more important changes, looking at
> appendices A anb B seems like a good place to start. If you like to
> see the list of tickets addressed, see [2]. Many smaller issues were
> discussed on dhcpv6bis mailing list [3].

A couple of quick comments:

- Appendix A.  Changes since RFC3315

   Note: This appendix should be removed by the RFC-Editor when
   preparing the document for publication.

I don't think it a good idea to completely skip a section on changes
from the updated RFCs (this comment applies to Appendix B too).  In
its current form the change list is quite useless, but that doesn't
mean we can/should simply omit including a list of changes.  In fact,
IMO, a change list is even more important for such a huge document as
this one.

This comment is also related to the review process - as a voluntary
(possible) reviewer, it's very painful to (be asked to) read a change
list like this one: in some cases it simply refers to some ticket
number without saying what's changed, and in some cases some of the
changes are made moot because of some later changes (e.g., there are
some changes related to the delayed authentication protocol, but
change #48 makes them irrelevant).

I would strongly suggest introducing a more readable and well
organized "Changes since" appendices (which should stay on
publication).  That will also help entice more people to review, or at
least take a glace of, the doc.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya