Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02

Alexey Melnikov <> Wed, 11 February 2015 11:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65431A8854; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:52:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YvEKOo-ehyjr; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:52:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C0471A8857; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:52:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1423655522;; s=selector;; bh=Q8jAbgpevzV1hApx37rTNtM01+b/nNQy3UGHnuGU1N8=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=iqH2+s4alzi9O/8/x7V2d/5dpRDPJ//W7hjJceqxRof78BR6ZViC2UmBbFF/0uqPPgql9d Nu58seHrR2nmU6lob7uwGJV7TfWOW+V7NJzdd/KwDJl767j3VDi1gyT0mrbA924rE1QX41 +tiwqmrPHtAv0Ra71i8lGfLQacTyRWw=;
Received: from [] ( []) by (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:52:01 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:51:52 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
Subject: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:52:09 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on 
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at 

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments 
you may receive.

Document:  draft-ietf-nfsv4-lfs-registry-02
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 2015-02-11
IETF LC End Date: 2015-02-16
IESG Telechat date: N/A.

Summary: This draft is nearly ready for publication as a standard track 
RFC (with nits).

Major issues:
Minor issues:

In Section 4:

"LSF" is used for the first time without being expanded. I suggest you 
introduce the abbreviation in the terminology section.

In Section 5:

Label Description: - what is the allowed character set for this field? 
Is it ASCII? Is it UTF-8 with some restrictions?

 >Status:  A short ASCII text string indicating the status of an entry
 >       in the registry.  The status field for most entries should have
 >       the value "active".  In the case that a label format selection
 >       entry is obsolete, the status field of the obsoleted entry should
 >       be "obsoleted by entry NNN".

What is entry NNN? Is it a document reference (e.g. An RFC)? Is it 
possible to obsolete without such entry?

In Section 5.3 - is it possible to update a label description document 
without requesting a new label? For example if changes are editorial and 
don't significantly affect label syntax and model.

Nits/editorial comments: