[Gen-art] Re: Genart last call review of draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I realized the question on obsoleting RFC 8110 (Q_2_1) is already discussed, 
so no reason for a separate thread because of my review.

Regards,

Christer

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, 8 August 2024 13.12
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
> draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02
>
> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> 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://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.
> ietf.org%2Fen%2Fgroup%2Fgen%2FGenArtFAQ&data=05%7C02%7Cchrister.
> holmberg%40ericsson.com%7C99d27bb12a3040f12ae308dcb79297f8%7C
> 92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C63858708744267201
> 2%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMz
> IiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=U1r89Vzutb
> %2Bjg2nvmclgiTu%2B5pMs0gyHcTwbxCQjI74%3D&reserved=0>.
>
> 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?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list -- [e-mail] To unsubscribe send an email to
> gen-
> [e-mail]