Re: [RTG-DIR] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-pim-registry-03

[Stig Venaas <[e-mail]>]

On 1/17/2011 5:57 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been selected as the Routing Directorate reviewer for this draft.
> The Routing Directorate seeks to review all routing or routing-related
> drafts as they pass through IETF last call and IESG review. The purpose
> of the review is to provide assistance to the Routing ADs. For more
> information about the Routing Directorate, please see
> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate/routing.html

Thanks, I agree with your comments. Just one question.

[...]
> Nits:
>
> There is an interesting nit in that you have RFC 3973 as a normative
> reference (which sounds deserving in the context of this document)
> but that RFC is an experimental RFC.

I'm not sure whether it is important, but I am wondering what is the
right solution here. Is it OK to have a normative reference, or should
it be an informative reference?

I'm sure it must be common that registries are created and need to
reference e.g. experimental RFCs. In some cases the registry reference
is not even an RFC. Perhaps it then makes more sense to list them as
informative references?

Stig

>
> cheers,
> jamal