[Int-area] draft-ietf-intarea-gue

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 28 March 2017 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-area@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B871294C9 for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 JnV-6_eOEj-j for <int-area@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x22e.google.com (mail-vk0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A308120727 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id d188so104824558vka.0 for <int-area@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=sljECEq/M2uj0BfKxsgRW4B9sodSzsaK2ygJ9kcGEVc=; b=tIx6RLJDbei606rZ4Jki8TDXM9Z+rV5zwKUkWlyQ2/nfk2h/fP2XF9XdiS1qNEaxM0 UY12RuA/eviGEKyiKpJc9FQTTsZpZolC/HasHZFqv3/tFtnTYvLH6wOVZTawCgLhTw8S rK/VLcZphTZcm/hDUrarmNsYF7r8h5w9PudaMRJVDtZlUujFDPWCh34ur6egu96/0THh uvV8Y1vWlRl2VIy+f/X59jLM6lM92XQXaSVta+c5UlmPa0EzB7HUOPytEGlD4U11Nis4 GaSW2i4F4PdZaUqj0zp5LHevXav2nWjOFaAcP7+0aU5VozyVkzMEOxsPB0Rgiqb3t09R hFgw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=sljECEq/M2uj0BfKxsgRW4B9sodSzsaK2ygJ9kcGEVc=; b=gWRycmEdkNz1/vG8hKnNCSy0Xe9OXO5/iCVoL6u9/sYwScyWevXtOLd/7qGrxZFRyh R3kxzMNEOlr880las0CJRezW8Z00uwq1BckRHDhHOq9E0mg5S0KgnzmwjFXSUwcUGbN/ 8TyfImHMPH8mz0cBOQrGWHMzSF7iRX0NetT5Ga+il3GP8/+CehwdE3sKkiH18qTgHunb nKwrCCoku8Y0DUfQb2Z3uQa/CGGwfkQEY9z2udjPBo6TAJV/uS26fuxcoG08sFmT4pnP IYQ2DxWQkr23mP7trCr5zQO2YzbZKbPtXM+MTJ4z3+/N2/PiAZ1H8zT3qTKR54tHOrj1 qC5A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0moPFyB+D4F75qds7raKHcMsLRRH6JztIh6vXjQHncL/mPBC3dj38nG2k76g9c2UK1/ZHW7Km5/3yY7w==
X-Received: by 10.31.61.194 with SMTP id k185mr14098370vka.141.1490738946306; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.130.70 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:09:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:09:05 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwascZ_-9hm_OOhD8gKMYVXbXDb0THLK6OjT+R60OmfRHg@mail.gmail.com>
To: int-area@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114dbd7058f765054bd1b58d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/cxjiU0BDxKBGjmdjMjEnkZ-G9pg>
Subject: [Int-area] draft-ietf-intarea-gue
X-BeenThere: int-area@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <int-area.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-area/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-area@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area>, <mailto:int-area-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:09:09 -0000

Hi there, a couple of follow-up items on this draft:

1) It was still showing as an NVO3 draft at the same time as of this
morning.  I think this just got fixed.

2) Tom's email address in IANA Considerations is from two employers ago.
Unless they're forwarding it, the registries should be updated with
something more current and preferably something permanent-ish.  Also, the
Reference is "draft-herbert-gue" which no longer exists and should probably
be "[this document]" or something similar; the RFC Editor knows what to do
with those prior to publication.

3) Numerous sections from 3.1 down still have some "may" that aren't MAY.
General RFC2119 fun.  Also, 3.5.1 and several points below have "should"
that aren't SHOULD.  Looks like all the "MUST"s have been handled though.

4) Several of the SHOULDs don't explain under what conditions one might
legitimately deviate from the advice attached to the SHOULD.  5.7 has a
good example of this, but it wasn't done for others earlier on.  I didn't
check past there this time, but any below should also be checked.  If
something that's a SHOULD has no legitimate deviation, make it a MUST.

5) 3.6 reads better now, thanks. The GUEEXTENS reference is broken though
(missing close-square-bracket) which means it's not made into a clickable
link.

-MSK