Re: [Mops] TreeDN Shepherd Review

Thanks for doing the shepherd writeup, Chris. MOPS appreciates your
service! I'm sure I'll see it when you submit it to the data tracker, but
ping me or the list anyway just in case I miss it, and I'll request
publication for the doc.

Authors: please feel free to address nits now, prior to submission to the
IESG, or indicate that you will wait for a final editorial pass in IETF LC.

Thanks,
Kyle

On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 6:29 PM Chris Lemmons <alficles@gmail.com> wrote:

> Oh, and... the document has the RFC 2119 boilerplate but doesn't
> actually use any of the keywords. This should also be dropped.
>
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 4:13 PM Chris Lemmons <alficles@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have completed my shepherd writeup for the document, but during the
> > process, I located a few very minor editorial problems with the
> > document. Here's what I have for the remaining nits. The usage of
> > non-ASCII punctuation marks and the obsolete reference should, in my
> > opinion, be changed. If you're issuing a new draft to fix those, it
> > might be worthwhile to update the out-of-date draft references, but I
> > don't think that's critical and could be skipped, especially if the
> > changes on the new drafts are time-consuming to review.
> >
> > The Problem Statement section title is an acceptable editorial choice
> > and this document shepherd likes it :), but I'm flagging it in case it
> > wasn't an intentional one and you would prefer to use the more
> > commonly used Introduction.
> >
> > Here's my current nits section in my writeup:
> >
> > There are 13 lines with non-ASCII punctuation marks, like '‘', '’',
> > '“', and '”'. These do not appear to comport with any of the usage
> > guidelines for non-ASCII Unicode characters as described in RFC 7997.
> >
> > The Introduction section is named "Problem Statement". This appears to
> > be an acceptable editorial decision per RFC 7322§4.8.1.
> >
> > A number of references are slightly stale, but none appear to be
> critical:
> > - The year has incremented by one, because that is how time works. :)
> > - draft-ietf-bess-bgp-multicast-05 has a -07
> > - draft-ietf-ipsecme-g-ikev2-09 has a -10
> > - draft-jholland-quic-multicast-03 has a -03
> >
> > The informational reference to RFC 6830 is, however, out of date. This
> > document was obsoleted by RFCs 9300 and 9301.
>
> --
> Mops mailing list
> Mops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops
>