IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-speechsc-mrcpv2-24.txt

Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com> Mon, 31 October 2011 01:20 UTC

Return-Path: <dburnett@voxeo.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFB621F8C39 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.241
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.241 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.358, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7qfABTjeGwdM for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from voxeo.com (mmail.voxeo.com [66.193.54.208]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 996FD21F8C37 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:20:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [209.237.253.51] (account dburnett@voxeo.com HELO [10.119.5.202]) by voxeo.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTPSA id 98386215; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 01:20:15 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DBFA327.7070404@ericsson.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 21:20:13 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DBDEADE6-F5F4-4A25-B5E5-C857382D29F1@voxeo.com>
References: <4DBFA327.7070404@ericsson.com>
To: "Miguel A. Garcia" <Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: Saravanan Shanmugham <sarvi@cisco.com>, Dave Oran <oran@cisco.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-speechsc-mrcpv2-24.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 01:20:16 -0000

I have removed all but one of your comments below.  This comment had not yet been addressed.  With this reply I believe I have addressed all of your comments.  If you find that I have missed one please let me know.

-- dan

On May 3, 2011, at 2:39 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:

> 
> - Section 13.1.6 describes a mechanism where vendor-specific extensions use the reverse DNS mechanism, for example., "com.example.foo". Then, if the vendor-specific extension is connected to DNS to avoid clashes in names, why is there a need for an expert review policy prior to its registration? I see a contradiction in having a self-managing registry by avoiding clashes due to the connection to DNS, and then having anything else than a volunteer registry.
> 

In the next draft I will replace "Expert Review" with "First Come First Served".

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email