[xrblock] nits in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-02

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 21 October 2015 14:07 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0BB1A884D for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 07:07:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.909
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lgk1crdVXGvl for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 07:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E39F1A8844 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 07:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,634,1432612800"; d="scan'208,217";a="147706339"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2015 10:07:28 -0400
X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1
Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com) ([]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 21 Oct 2015 10:07:28 -0400
Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:07:26 +0200
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: "Huangyihong (Rachel)" <rachel.huang@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: nits in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-02
Thread-Index: AdEMCc4WzzQohZhGQ1KoATeWxoftYA==
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:07:26 +0000
Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5CB57A21@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5CB57A21AZFFEXMB04globa_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xrblock/ifjv62GZXYyJr1Nov8ynuj8aEjM>
Cc: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
Subject: [xrblock] nits in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-02
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework working group discussion list <xrblock.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xrblock/>
List-Post: <mailto:xrblock@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:07:34 -0000

Hi Rachel,

Running idnits with draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-02 results in a number of errors and warnings:

Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :

  ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC7294], [RFC3611]), which
     it shouldn't.  Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the
     documents in question.

  Miscellaneous warnings:

  ** The document contains RFC2119-like boilerplate, but doesn't seem to
     mention RFC 2119.  The boilerplate contains a reference [KEYWORDS], but
     that reference does not seem to mention RFC 2119 either.

  -- The document date (September 11, 2015) is 40 days in the past.  Is this

  Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard

     (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references
     to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC3611' is mentioned on line 422, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC3550' is mentioned on line 108, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'KEYWORDS' is mentioned on line 135, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC6709' is mentioned on line 375, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC3711' is mentioned on line 413, but not defined

  == Missing Reference: 'RFC5124' is mentioned on line 415, but not defined

  ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 7201

  ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 7202

     Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 1 comment (--).

1.       References in the Abstract section need to be avoided

2.       Missing references - RFC 3611, 3550, 2119 (KEYWORDS), 6709, 3711, 5124 - please add

3.       RFC 7201, 7202 are downrefs - I suggest to move these to Informational References

If you have time please do the edits and send me the revised I-D. I will ask Alissa for a special approval to post, so that we can have the document submitted by IETF 94.

Thanks and Regards,