[Mops] TreeDN Shepherd Review

[Chris Lemmons <[e-mail]>]

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might be worthwhile to update the out-of-date draft references, but I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The informational reference to RFC 6830 is, however, out of date.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.