IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 01 March 2022 19:33 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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 F16FF3A0B2A for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 11:33:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 o2fJ8H6izGdp for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 11:33:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x530.google.com (mail-pg1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::530]) (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 9DE2F3A0B3D for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2022 11:33:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x530.google.com with SMTP id z4so15102250pgh.12 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 01 Mar 2022 11:33:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TBzit+OAHOJgLC2SdOgSQwjJIOYxJcIOaxTmZ0NW1Ds=; b=JalggUGYaAFZs/Hq8DdGGc/DO7MN9fGB6IDxfMGmIiV4ShpjC2mwWAuNgnL+fIIuha PnX1HWOOB3qg4YNkXkZ9pA5pgbGW2Hq2AE/WLsx8qSjrQYlScPgxjx80QfIr6ZW7EGqY lDICgtSSUSkrhaHHYxmowFaylCj7QRmXXyOQ7H/9P6+jxqjm/KRdL4mqo2HIpx7OOUdM huQpu9bIDSPvYOL/x10QeozGH7sD8jkYylIKAUmV36EG37ox18smx5czWsPTQ/YMOeZQ SM111EP30EGP59OX6oEPuxwYG7Ym8EtsqcZxAGxeLoQ6bAS7jM+76Ic8myTBcqWu47Qs /qpg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=TBzit+OAHOJgLC2SdOgSQwjJIOYxJcIOaxTmZ0NW1Ds=; b=BRz8iKMlTvOOVqo05A7ta+UhTDbP8i2igfHdeE6L/rzau4UKloqEbKvRGwL2j3BHn3 o0hcF7enSVzqawIs39y4dYyz/txrWpt1M65t36Hxavlg7pgOA8D7jc84wbNyPZZWJFKW AU4QcetTXkykfB7lcCQsB//GB65keOZRHpo++WcKHz9RQKF74zBbAT6cUf/B0lKPBaSo 9ZoUKsYjdCdPW6MTTydwawpP6qsBsw31OIpVfpZuXPPudaKSDwZdZ2a11M/nDMBVFkWf SoPoqJoDgxfnLPCCV8GhP4YiAqrDRf3hXH+KyI888mWZxUG3nUGlo1DNbGDxNapDiNy3 QozA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533rjKYwbIuzxEakQAk4B4DDua7M/arGxsg/0heuQdGpGJk0Obkx 3femTAr3fV4py2ndguDjfpM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzxLbykW0iec/noosy8TIM489+NDVldGO+RquZftE/NGB009d/U2UGX3w1P6GJ+SApHGK4Ajg==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:10a:0:b0:372:e458:e707 with SMTP id 10-20020a63010a000000b00372e458e707mr22884685pgb.39.1646163183344; Tue, 01 Mar 2022 11:33:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1005:b501:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s2-20020a056a001c4200b004f41e1196fasm5250662pfw.17.2022.03.01.11.33.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Mar 2022 11:33:02 -0800 (PST)
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, "rfced-future@iab.org" <rfced-future@iab.org>
References: <f7c2b9d8-4395-776b-80ea-1d0dfc00bb7c@stpeter.im> <113a58dc-ab33-8861-556e-5d7e34337a30@stpeter.im>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>
Message-ID: <458401df-ec78-bd05-b92b-99e873997892@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2022 08:32:58 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <113a58dc-ab33-8861-556e-5d7e34337a30@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/FwHJV4ImcUW4ERyY9G68LQKJY7Q>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Fwd: 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: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 19:33:11 -0000

Peter,

Stig is correct about the Obsoletes and Updates typography. The RFC format
does *not* include "RFC", it is just

Obsoletes: 8728 (if approved)
Updates: 7841, 8729, 8730 (if approved)

In kramdown, that's

obsoletes: 8728

or in xml

obsoletes="8728"

Regards
    Brian

On 02-Mar-22 07:58, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> I somehow dropped the program list from this reply...
> 
> 
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: Rtgdir last call review of draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2022 10:52:33 -0700
> From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
> To: Stig Venaas <stig@venaas.com>, rtg-dir@ietf.org
> CC: draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model.all@ietf.org, iab@iab.org,
> last-call@ietf.org
> 
> Hi Stig, thanks for your review.
> 
> On 2/24/22 7:00 PM, Stig Venaas via Datatracker wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Hmm, I don't see that...
> 
>      Obsoletes: RFC8728 (if approved)
>      Updates: RFC7841, RFC8729, RFC8730 (if approved)
> 
> and...
> 
>      This document obsoletes [RFC8728] by defining version 3 of the RFC
>      Editor Model.  This document updates [RFC7841] by defining
>      boilerplate text for the Editorial Stream.  This document updates
>      [RFC8729] by replacing the RFC Editor role with the RSWG, RSAB, and
>      RSCE.  This document updates [RFC8730] by removing the dependency on
>      certain policies specified by the IAB and RSE.
> 
>> In 3.1.1.4. paragraph 4:
>> "participation for those unable to to attend in person."
>> Double "to".
> 
> It seems that you reviewed -10, not -11 (which is the latest), since
> that exact text is in -10 but not -11.
> 
>> I'm wondering whether any of the references should be normative, but it may not
>> make sense for this document.
> 
> Indeed we concluded that it didn't make sense for this document.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Peter
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email