Re: [Gen-art] [dane] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-dane-registry-acronyms-03

[Olafur Gudmundsson <[e-mail]>]

On Jan 15, 2014, at 10:11 AM, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>  
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>  
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.
>  
> Document: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dane-registry-acronyms-03.txt
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review Date: 1/15/2014
> IETF LC End Date: 1/23/2014
> IESG Telechat date:
>  
> Summary:
> Ready with issues
>  
> Major issues:
> None – it’s a simple, clear and useful document.

thanks 

>  
> Minor issues:
> 1.       In Section 2.3 the I-D recommends that the values in reference column for SHA-256 and SHA-512 refer to [RFC 6698] while the IANA Considerations section in RFC 6698 recommends and the registry entries in the TLSA Matching Types table athttp://www.iana.org/assignments/dane-parameters/dane-parameters.xhtml  point to [RFC 6234].

Good Catch, fixed 

> 2.       As this I-D updates the registries with a column for acronyms, it seems more accurate that the reference columns of all tables mention both  [RFC 6698] and [RFC XXXX] (this RFC)

I'm not sure if I agree, all this document does is to change the format of the registries it is not the definitions of any table entry. 
But I think it would be good to change the reference for each of the registries to point to both RFC6698 and RFCXXXX 

I propose adding to each registry sections the following text: 
        "Update reference for this registry to include both [RFC6698] and [RFC-this-document]"

>  
> Nits/editorial comments:
> In the Introduction section:
> ‘This document updates the IANA registry definition for TLSA
>    record to add a column with acronym for each specified field’
> s/acronym/an acronym/
>  

Fixed 

thanks 

	Olafur