Re: [dispatch] Genart last call review of draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-03

[Timothy Mcsweeney <[e-mail]>]

Hello, 

 

According to BCP26/RFC8126 section 5.3 Designated expert reviews, it says:"

 When a designated expert is used, the documentation should give clear
   guidance to the designated expert, laying out criteria for performing
   an evaluation and reasons for rejecting a request.

I don't see the above in this document.  This is going to have to be added to have any kind of validity or the IESG should reject to publication of this document.  Especially because this entire document will updating the IANA considerations section of rfc3405.

 

Tim

 

On 08/31/2020 11:23 PM Brian Carpenter via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:

 

 

Reviewer: Brian Carpenter

Review result: Ready

 

Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-03

 

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

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

 

Document: draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-03

Reviewer: Brian Carpenter

Review Date: 2020-09-01

IETF LC End Date: 2020-09-24

IESG Telechat date:

 

Summary: Ready (with micro-nit)

--------

 

Nits:

-----

 

1. Introduction

Part five of the Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS), RFC 3405

[RFC3405], describes the registration procedures for assignments in

URI.ARPA. The document requires that registrations be in the "IETF

tree" of URI registrations. The use of URI scheme name trees was

defined in RFC 2717 [RFC2717] but discontinued by RFC 4395 [RFC4395].

Since the use of trees was discontinued, there is no way in the

current process set out in BCP 35 [RFC7595] to meet the requirement.

This is indeed a nit, but I'd prefer s/the requirement/the above requirement/.

The current text did make me briefly think "Which requirement?".

 

 

_______________________________________________

dispatch mailing list

[e-mail]

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch" target="_blank" rel="noopener nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch