IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Rfced-future] Fwd: [IAB] Rtgdir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11

Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Fri, 25 February 2022 09:29 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC633A12AC for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 01:29:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ol2A9YI-ztJO for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 01:28:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BBF53A1296 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 01:28:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p200300dee70b4b00685b2e0302e763a7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e70b:4b00:685b:2e03:2e7:63a7]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1nNWuC-0005Xh-PQ; Fri, 25 Feb 2022 10:28:52 +0100
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BDDEC3BE-5296-441E-84BA-969000305EE0"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Message-Id: <3AF2858F-6794-47FD-828D-3ED9358A55CE@kuehlewind.net>
References: <164575444392.24459.14871993066473295047@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: rfced-future@iab.org
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 10:28:51 +0100
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1645781338;c8569390;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1nNWuC-0005Xh-PQ
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/CxwPeGkuWd2JUSwAW2j-pLE54po>
Subject: [Rfced-future] Fwd: [IAB] Rtgdir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2022 09:29:12 -0000

FYI

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Stig Venaas via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> Subject: [IAB] Rtgdir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
> Date: 25. February 2022 at 03:00:44 CET
> To: <rtg-dir@ietf.org>
> Cc: last-call@ietf.org, iab@iab.org, draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model.all@ietf.org
> Reply-To: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
> 
> Reviewer: Stig Venaas
> Review result: Has Nits
> 
> I have reviewed the document and it is in good shape.
> 
> The document has a few nits found by the idnits tool. The string "RFC" should
> not be included when specifing "obsoletes:" or "updates:". Also the abstract
> mentions that the documents obsoletes or updates documents that are not listed
> by the obsoletes/updates headers.
> 
> In 3.1.1.4. paragraph 4:
> "participation for those unable to to attend in person."
> Double "to".
> 
> I'm wondering whether any of the references should be normative, but it may not
> make sense for this document.
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email