[Enum] NITS review of draft-ietf-enum-validation-epp-02
Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@enum.at> Wed, 08 February 2006 12:05 UTC
Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1F6o4T-0008A2-4s; Wed, 08 Feb 2006 07:05:17 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1F6o4R-00089D-Hc for enum@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2006 07:05:15 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15717 for <enum@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Feb 2006 07:03:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [193.80.224.123] (helo=kahua.nona.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F6oGw-0001YZ-PG for enum@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Feb 2006 07:18:16 -0500
Received: from [10.10.0.63] (nat.labs.nic.at [::ffff:83.136.33.3]) (AUTH: PLAIN axelm, TLS: TLSv1/SSLv3,256bits,AES256-SHA) by pahula with esmtp; Wed, 08 Feb 2006 13:04:33 +0100 id 0006C002.43E9DE51.000066D2
Message-ID: <43E9DE3E.8050201@enum.at>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 13:04:14 +0100
From: Alexander Mayrhofer <alexander.mayrhofer@enum.at>
Organization: enum.at GmbH
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: enum@ietf.org, Bernie Hoeneisen <bhoeneis@switch.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc:
Subject: [Enum] NITS review of draft-ietf-enum-validation-epp-02
X-BeenThere: enum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Enum Discussion List <enum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum>, <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:enum@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum>, <mailto:enum-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: enum-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: enum-bounces@ietf.org
Hi, i've reviewed the draft, here are my comments: - The draft passes the idnits checker - good. - Abbreviations in abstract: Some (not all!) RFC have acronyms spelled out in the Abstract - i've a request pending with the RFC editors about this. - Introduction: Please move references to the first occurence (namely ENUM [4] from 3rd para to 1st para as well als EPP). There's no need to repeat references within the document, like the ENUM reference in section 4.1. - XML elements are sometimes called "elements", sometimes "field" (4.5.1, 4.5.2 eg.) Please unify the terminology regarding XML elements. - 4.4: I'd add quotes around the word "any" - that would make it clearer that this is a name, and not the word "any". In addition, i'd point out that this is the a schema element by using 'XML schema "any" element'. - Please put the element/attribute names in quotes. That makes it easier to distinguish element names. Most EPP RFCs, however, use <element> to identify XML elements - if the Draft should fit into them, that would be an approach, too. However, putting elements between <>'s would then clash with the command identifiers, however this is already mixed in eg. 5.1.2 where there is an "<info> command", but also an "<resData> element". That should be cleaned up. - An XML schema identifier plus namespace in the urn:ietf range is used for the validation example data section - however, there is no registration requested in the IANA section for this. - The reference to the EPP domain mapping is repeated several times in the draft. I don't think that this is neccessary. - What about including a sentence like "The number of validationInfo elements per domain instance is subject to local registry policy" somewhere. That would make it clear that you might eg. limit the number of validationInfo elements to 1 per domain (as we are doing that right now ;) - After "Figure 2": What about changing the sentence to "... successfully, an EPP response as described in the EPP domain mapping is returned"? Same after Figure 3 etc.. - Both XML schemas pass the validation at http://www.w3.org/2001/03/webdata/xsv - IANA considerations: As mentioned above, the e164valex is missing. tia, alex _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
- [Enum] NITS review of draft-ietf-enum-validation-… Alexander Mayrhofer