[regext] Minor feedback on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-00

Jasdip Singh <jasdips@arin.net> Thu, 11 June 2020 18:00 UTC

Return-Path: <jasdips@arin.net>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EBDA3A0C7A for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:00:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nYu1AztxO6xm for <regext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.arin.net (smtp1.arin.net [IPv6:2001:500:110:201::51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F26923A0C78 for <regext@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 11:00:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net (cas02cha.corp.arin.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp1.arin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 477C910757B4 for <regext@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:00:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from CAS01CHA.corp.arin.net ( by CAS02CHA.corp.arin.net ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:00:46 -0400
Received: from CAS01CHA.corp.arin.net ([fe80::51fb:9cc2:1f9a:288b]) by CAS01CHA.corp.arin.net ([fe80::988:2227:cf44:809%17]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.000; Thu, 11 Jun 2020 14:00:46 -0400
From: Jasdip Singh <jasdips@arin.net>
To: "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Minor feedback on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-00
Thread-Index: AQHWQBo6Lce/R1EwzUyXD3B6VcoUFg==
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:00:45 +0000
Message-ID: <8D785905-2E5E-4312-BCBD-B3442BE122A9@arin.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_8D7859052E5E4312BCBDB3442BE122A9arinnet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/4aYAoR74EGyn5jgOxQp13RlkAgE>
Subject: [regext] Minor feedback on draft-ietf-regext-rfc7483bis-00
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: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 18:00:53 -0000

Hello Scott.

While doing the shepherd writeup, noted few minor things which may help polish the doc further.

  *   5.5: Add “The” to the "Autonomous System Number Object Class” section title to be consistent with others.
  *   1, 5, 5.4, 5.5, 7, 8: Looks like the [I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis] reference needs the correct link. Additionally, in section 8, [I-D.ietf-regext-rfc7482bis] has no link.
  *   1.1: Is the trailing period intended for member, object, and object class definitions?
  *   2.1: Should lunarNic prefix in the fields match the casing of the lunarNIC prefix for the extension in 4.1? I know there was some discussion on this but not sure if they are orthogonal or not.
  *   4.5: Looks like extraneous trailing period for eventDate description.
  *   5.3: Does the description of the network member need a trailing period?
  *   5.5: "high-level structure of the autnum object class consists of information about the network registration” - should “network” be changed to "autonomous system number”?
  *   Should phrase “registry unique” be “registry-unique” to be consistent?
  *   13.2: [RFC7480] needs a link.
  *   Typo “referencce” in the Changes from RFC 7483 section. Also, “00:” used twice in the list.