Re: [regext] doc shepherd comments for draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance-14

James Galvin <galvin@elistx.com> Sat, 19 June 2021 00:49 UTC

Return-Path: <galvin@elistx.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C223A1951 for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=elistx-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 zlwvVqokX47K for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72e.google.com (mail-qk1-x72e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72e]) (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 DBE533A1943 for <regext@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72e.google.com with SMTP id g4so14033021qkl.1 for <regext@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=elistx-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HDtf0mYxKp46suefgZZpwX2mkmQtMflnsC2FpLCh5NE=; b=rfDBWK+wslaRdHosLwvCIE/IRP5C2PeP+zikHNuA3DdMhyJ/1lBrQUMjQXWAfEs2yk Op1ZwYNvRR7kZkQ3KYiqp3Y1U2mKmkZIv0Ytlu0fZHGY7fEaKs2adGlNre7B8cvXZZqw e8gjkXdiFHa3js2H8ARC/9MMz8GkEDtT4MiNRf7l9FoKjGFPbJZCvEGOJyrV1TrktQ1V zWJ7RnTfcmJlssXVF4PBztryF/rsUI91txjJZymfdjjdEU1yhMEGS1hXzNIQXLt9Rc5I C+NcV74AeZG0vWD3pqCPAwnN1z9wW2g3isHJngRGnDWmzDWVrbZdJqC59FhPa/WYMvPM CLMg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=HDtf0mYxKp46suefgZZpwX2mkmQtMflnsC2FpLCh5NE=; b=hpT1rbxIS9BghbgflbxFLuPQ9oPqOtU9ratj+LhJm/3Xnsts+upQSQoQkknLIv7Ohu lnahv9jq2QgZCZiwzUxKXnM3XnYAqDuSU3IdXT06c31NhEX3Sp7MYZIjW8HULt2T8LK0 qOneCXYWt/yjTZPjrnkGKL1m4FDdANAT2LJZf4HB3JnKJjJf//4WGWgwcBPJYIMvfkxy yYXbfHS4ZDI1ZV7UPlbKGAOvynfF6tSSvrfaIs6na8jFaOy8QSpRxqmrTXmmQQMZD2DR /KTy3h16w7PEAHXTAOJm4UfJ96zO36RmMugd4ubS0OLEQmsVaDzi9Yp9PLeM5yqZ8BeT GMZA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531xJfRyNCesUgYJklDSAysNZCAoVSGn4PK/n5etRtAZcCM3R31s KKWjVdoOjKNjakjrLUSLuhqLdQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwWB4qc1BlBLwQwv9eqoj/SemDJfABuSnQymhhR/oqKM4l0BuFl3MnNpmWqfSMRuENoSia/FA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:214e:: with SMTP id m14mr10971311qkm.496.1624063756129; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.99] ([2601:154:c200:3460:2033:405e:c42e:c17b]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id m11sm3754820qtn.81.2021.06.18.17.49.14 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Galvin <galvin@elistx.com>
To: Tobias Sattler <tobias.sattler@me.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance.authors@ietf.org, Registration Protocols Extensions <regext@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 20:49:14 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.2r5673)
Message-ID: <542C203E-C90C-4E7A-A517-7E14407272B4@elistx.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA662C3D-9542-4048-9A58-68C421556027@me.com>
References: <F1D48C2D-7E64-4820-9A8B-3D47E56A2AF7@elistx.com> <CA662C3D-9542-4048-9A58-68C421556027@me.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/0aotwhF-VQ1e8Dj5jfDHTPSaK1o>
Subject: Re: [regext] doc shepherd comments for draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance-14
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 00:49:32 -0000

Thanks for the quick response.

One comment inline.



On 18 Jun 2021, at 16:52, Tobias Sattler wrote:

> Thank you, Jim.
>
> I have prepared a new version already and ready to do another update 
> to address your points. If that doesn’t break the process.
>
> Please see my comments inline.
>
>> On 18. Jun 2021, at 22:14, James Galvin <galvin@elistx.com> wrote:
>>
>> As document shepherd I have reviewed:
>>
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance-14
>>
>> and provided a shepherd writeup so it can be submitted to the IESG 
>> for publication.
>>
>> However, I note the following three editorial nits that the authors 
>> should correct before submission to the IESG.
>>
>>
>> 1. The document has a normative reference to an internet-draft that 
>> has been recently published as an RFC:
>>
>> 	draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces -> RFC9038
>>
>
> TS: Changed.
>
>>
>> 2. In this paragraph, Section 1.1:
>>
>>   XML is case sensitive. Unless stated otherwise, XML specifications
>>   moreover, examples provided in this document MUST be interpreted in
>>   the character case presented to develop a conforming 
>> implementation.
>>
>> Change “specifications” to “specification”.  Drop 
>> “moreover,”.
>>
>
> TS: According to other RFCs, such as RFC9038, it says “Unless stated 
> otherwise, XML specifications and examples provided …” Would you 
> be fine with changing it like that?

Works for me.  Thanks!

Jim


>
>>
>> 3. In this paragraph, Section 1.1:
>>
>>   In examples, "C:" represents lines sent by a protocol client and
>>   "S:" represents lines returned by a protocol server. Indentation 
>> and
>>   white space in examples are provided only to illustrate element
>>   relationships and are not a REQUIRED feature of this protocol.
>>
>> Downcase the use of “REQUIRED”.
>
> TS: Changed.
>
>>
>>
>> With those changes I would recommend to Antoin Verschuren as the 
>> responsible Chair for this document to submit the next version to the 
>> IESG for publication.
>>
>> Jim