Return-Path: X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4754C1A8709 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.277 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A2P2ql3kVa_r for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lb0-x236.google.com (mail-lb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5A411A2119 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id f15so1380530lbj.27 for ; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=22tEJook7e7yb1/+qjfmweKKT9SZZ+IjJ+7VXmswSKU=; b=CZOhSIwkBKr39w0ZDlOwtKvhXLsWR/+PTtwsB5qwS748bgn2VDbVSxd42hbMWTFus5 BW1P0j4dUrRRhjPv7Z9C9ExHjfFiN2tF7OGx6sRZQ/hb/SKGoVZIbmaok0jgsKrgARQg ZFElKRkRiz/SuUqYAnlwHrtS/z0DGzoR/AhWc+4CmMDv8gkkIdQYpHzTjfn0+r8Fjwum KAOepF4bHudqsDICiZyrVno3x6XQQezJ0EYUtsEKCCkY+Rk8pg1eRWDHyW8OOQFNhQ3N tjoZEkg0+PjlsYSKiIqGCrQs41S15MjbP0PKI/bf37swFhQmglMx3MZG4DqFgl0B5M9Q 3OYQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.162.41 with SMTP id xx9mr29753067lbb.21.1416947382393; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:42 -0800 (PST) Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com Received: by 10.152.127.168 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:29:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5C9092ED@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5C90B915@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 15:29:42 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: id21zpaW09bdyrHiZQLQDN0OW6k Message-ID: From: Barry Leiba To: Jari Arkko Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0116062264a3680508b4c5cb Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/xIjulev2EdXEcloG7hScPX_z7Ts Cc: "gen-art@ietf.org" , "draft-murdock-nato-nid.all@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 20:29:46 -0000 --089e0116062264a3680508b4c5cb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 There will be a revised I-D. Barry On Tuesday, November 25, 2014, Jari Arkko wrote: > Thanks, Dan and Barry. > > Is there a new rev or RFC Editor -notes? > > On 20 Nov 2014, at 15:13, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > wrote: > > > Hi Barry, > > > > This looks reasonable, thanks for the timely response and for addressing > my comments. I suggest that the editor also fixes the text in section 7. > > > > Regards, > > > > Dan > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: barryleiba@gmail.com [mailto:barryleiba@gmail.com > ] On Behalf Of > >> Barry Leiba > >> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 8:53 PM > >> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > >> Cc: gen-art@ietf.org ; > draft-murdock-nato-nid.all@tools.ietf.org > >> Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt > >> > >> Thanks for the review, Dan. > >> > >>> 1. The document does not expand the acronym NATO at the first > >>> occurrence. Moreover, in section 7 it mentions 'that a standards body, > >>> like NATO' which is misleading - as NATO is not a standards body. I > >>> suggest to use the full name in the title and abstract, expand the > >>> acronym at first occurrence and correct the text in Section 7. > >> > >> The AD/shepherd agrees. > >> > >>> 2. The abstract and introduction should make clear that this is a > >>> request made according to RFC 3406 for a formal URN space type, as > >>> described in Section 4.3 of RFC 3406. > >> > >> I suppose that I agree with that, too, though I think it's less > important. But > >> something like this should do nicely: > >> > >> OLD > >> This document describes a Uniform Resource Name (URN) namespace for > >> assignment by NATO. The current primary use is for uniquely > >> identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifacts that provide > >> information about NATO message text formats and service > >> specifications as described in various NATO standards [4], > >> instructions and publications. > >> > >> NEW > >> This document allocates a formal Uniform Resource Name (URN) > >> namespace for assignment by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization > >> (NATO), as specified in RFC 3406. The current primary use is for > >> uniquely identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifacts > >> that provide information about NATO message text formats and > >> service specifications as described in various NATO standards, > >> instructions and publications. > >> > >> END > >> > >> (That also removes the reference ("[4]") in the abstract, as the RFC > Editor > >> doesn't allow references in abstracts.) And then a similar change in > the > >> Introduction section. > >> > >>> I could not find in the summary written by the AD shepherd an > >>> indication whether this review occurred. > >> > >> The AD/shepherd apologises profusely for his typo: the writeup said > "uri- > >> review", where it should have said "urn-nid". I've corrected the error > in the > >> writeup, and, yes, the review happened. > >> > >> Ira, I'm going to move the document into IESG Evaluation state now. > >> Please update the I-D as soon as you can with the above minor changes. > >> Thanks. > >> > >> Barry > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gen-art mailing list > > Gen-art@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > > --089e0116062264a3680508b4c5cb Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There will be a revised I-D.

Barry

On Tuesday, No= vember 25, 2014, Jari Arkko <= jari.arkko@ericsson.com> wrote:
Th= anks, Dan and Barry.

Is there a new rev or RFC Editor -notes?

On 20 Nov 2014, at 15:13, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <dromas= ca@avaya.com> wrote:

> Hi Barry,
>
> This looks reasonable, thanks for the timely response and for addressi= ng my comments. I suggest that the editor also fixes the text in section 7.=
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: barryleiba@gmail.com [mailto:barryleiba@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
>> Barry Leiba
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 8:53 PM
>> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
>> Cc: gen-art@ietf.org; draft-murdock-nato-nid.all@tools.ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-murdock-nato-nid-02.txt
>>
>> Thanks for the review, Dan.
>>
>>> 1.=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0The document does not expand the acronym NATO= at the first
>>> occurrence. Moreover, in section 7 it mentions 'that a sta= ndards body,
>>> like NATO' which is misleading - as NATO is not a standard= s body. I
>>> suggest to use the full name in the title and abstract, expand= the
>>> acronym at first occurrence and correct the text in Section 7.=
>>
>> The AD/shepherd agrees.
>>
>>> 2.=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0The abstract and introduction should make cle= ar that this is a
>>> request made according to RFC 3406 for a formal URN space type= , as
>>> described in Section 4.3 of RFC 3406.
>>
>> I suppose that I agree with that, too, though I think it's les= s important.=A0 But
>> something like this should do nicely:
>>
>> OLD
>>=A0 =A0This document describes a Uniform Resource Name (URN) namesp= ace for
>>=A0 =A0assignment by NATO.=A0 The current primary use is for unique= ly
>>=A0 =A0identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifacts that = provide
>>=A0 =A0information about NATO message text formats and service
>>=A0 =A0specifications as described in various NATO standards [4], >>=A0 =A0instructions and publications.
>>
>> NEW
>>=A0 =A0This document allocates a formal Uniform Resource Name (URN)=
>>=A0 =A0namespace for assignment by the North Atlantic Treaty Organi= zation
>>=A0 =A0(NATO), as specified in RFC 3406.=A0 The current primary use= is for
>>=A0 =A0uniquely identifying Extensible Markup Language (XML) artifa= cts
>>=A0 =A0that provide information about NATO message text formats and=
>>=A0 =A0service specifications as described in various NATO standard= s,
>>=A0 =A0instructions and publications.
>>
>> END
>>
>> (That also removes the reference ("[4]") in the abstract= , as the RFC Editor
>> doesn't allow references in abstracts.)=A0 And then a similar = change in the
>> Introduction section.
>>
>>> I could not find in the summary written by the AD shepherd an<= br> >>> indication whether this review occurred.
>>
>> The AD/shepherd apologises profusely for his typo: the writeup sai= d "uri-
>> review", where it should have said "urn-nid".=A0 I&= #39;ve corrected the error in the
>> writeup, and, yes, the review happened.
>>
>> Ira, I'm going to move the document into IESG Evaluation state= now.
>> Please update the I-D as soon as you can with the above minor chan= ges.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Barry
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

--089e0116062264a3680508b4c5cb--