Re: [Mops] -13 of mops-ar-use-case

[Stephan Wenger <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mops and especially Mops chairs:

I will not be able to attend today’s MOPS session.

I believe all previously identified shortcomings have been adequately addressed, with the exception of the possibly “required’ IANA section.  I believe a dummy IANA section is nowadays required (so that IANA knows they don’t have to act), but I would happily stand corrected if I were wrong, especially for corner cases such as this use-case-only RFC.

I think the word file distributed on 10/27 by Renan is the complete shepherd writeup.

Thanks,
Stephan


From: Mops <[e-mail]> on behalf of Renan Krishna <Renan.Krishna=[e-mail]>
Date: Friday, October 27, 2023 at 07:12
To: Stephan Wenger <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Mops] -13 of mops-ar-use-case
Hi Stephan,

Please find our response to question 10 of the report added in the attached file.

Regards,
Renan

From: Mops <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Stephan Wenger
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 4:57 PM
To: Renan Krishna <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: [Mops] -13 of mops-ar-use-case


Hi,
Shepherd here.  I had a brief look.  Additional action items, before this draft can progress:

1.      Add a dummy IANA section.

2.      I need your written disposition (outside the draft; and can be short summaries) to question 10 of the report.  I would hope not, but maybe the questions raised in the area questionnaires lead to further modifications of the draft, especially in areas that you probably consider side shows.

3.      Once you have -14 submission ready, run IDNITS in its most verbose mode.  Given that the IDNITS tool reports the missing IANA section, I don’t think you did, or if you did, then you didn’t look at the report, or considered the warning of the missing IANA section as irrelevant.  Neither is acceptable.  Please briefly explain to me any errors/warnings IDNITS produces.

4.      After you addressed above three points, please submit -14.
Thanks,
Stephan