Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-02.txt
Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Mon, 19 February 2007 17:13 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HJC4v-0004F7-1J; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:13:29 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HJC4u-0004Ez-5x; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:13:28 -0500
Received: from imr1.ericy.com ([198.24.6.9]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HJC4s-000120-Pu; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:13:28 -0500
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l1JHDFZG026922; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:13:15 -0600
Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.51]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:13:15 -0600
Received: from [142.133.10.140] ([142.133.10.140]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 11:13:15 -0600
Message-ID: <45D9DA9D.4040706@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 12:13:01 -0500
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060313)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Keith McCloghrie <kzm@cisco.com>
References: <200702191643.IAA15790@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <200702191643.IAA15790@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Feb 2007 17:13:15.0249 (UTC) FILETIME=[3DFA0610:01C75449]
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5
Cc: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, hvivek@cisco.com, cds@cisco.com, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-02.txt
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Keith, Please find comments inline. Thanks Suresh > Without this sentence, the boilerplate implies that all of the listed > keywords are present in the document. Since the boilerplate cannot be > changed, the sentence was included to avoid the erroneous implication. I do not know of any draft/RFC which uses all of these keywords, but I am fine with leaving the sentence in. > >> Editorial: >> ========== >> >> * No expiration date for draft on the first and last pages. According to >> >> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt >> =========================================== >> >> A document expiration date should appear on the first and last page >> of the Internet-Draft. The expiration date is 185 days following the >> submission of the document as an Internet-Draft. Use of the phrase >> "expires in six months" or "expires in 185 days" is not acceptable. > > The footer (on every page) contains the expiry date. I was expecting a date and I found only the month in the footer. > >> * Intended Status of the document is not specified in the draft. (I >> found it is Proposed Standard using the ID Tracker) > > The guidelines say: > > The Internet-Draft should neither state nor imply that it has any > standards status; to do so conflicts with the role of the RFC Editor > and the IESG. The title of the document should not imply a status. > Avoid the use of the terms Standard, Proposed, Draft, Experimental, > Historic, Required, Recommended, Elective, or Restricted in the title > of the Internet-Draft. Indicating what status the document is aimed > for is OK, but should be done with the words "Intended status: > <status>". > > Since the I-D neither states nor implies that it has any standards status, > I believe it complies. The restrictions on normative references are different for standards track documents as compared to informational documents. That is why the "Intended Status:" in the draft makes it easier to check for possible downward references. It is fine to leave it out. That is why it is a nit :-). _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: complex extensions attacking IETF protocols Masataka Ohta
- Re: complex extensions attacking IETF protocols Bob Stewart
- Re: complex extensions attacking IETF protocols Karl Denninger
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Keith McCloghrie
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Dave Crocker
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Tom Petch
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Sam Hartman
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Sam Hartman
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Keith McCloghrie
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Jeffrey Hutzelman
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Eliot Lear
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Eliot Lear
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Eliot Lear
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: ISMS working group and charter problems Eliot Lear
- Re: ISMS working group Keith McCloghrie
- Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on… Keith McCloghrie
- Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-… Keith McCloghrie
- Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: IETF MAILING: REGISTERED ATTENDEES: December … Masataka Ohta
- Re: IETF MAILING: REGISTERED ATTENDEES: December … Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Brian Carpenter CERN-CN
- Re: IAB/IETF standardization process Masataka Ohta
- Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to Propo… IESG Secretary
- Re: IETF MAILING: REGISTERED ATTENDEES: December … Masataka Ohta
- Copyright Confusion (was Re: IAB/IETF standardiza… Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (Beast)
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Copyright Confusion (was Re: IAB/IETF standar… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Copyright Confusion (was Re: IAB/IETF standar… carl
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… vincent birritteri ee stnt
- Re: IAB/IETF standardization process Simon E Spero
- Re: IETF MAILING: REGISTERED ATTENDEES: December … Masataka Ohta
- Re: IAB/IETF standardization process Masataka Ohta
- Re: IETF MAILING: REGISTERED ATTENDEES: December … Masataka Ohta
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Mark Laubach
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Masataka Ohta
- Re: IAB/IETF standardization process Mark Crispin
- Re: IAB/IETF standardization process Theodore Ts'o
- Re: Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to P… Masataka Ohta
- Last Call: Classical IP and ARP over ATM to Propo… The IESG