Hi Brian,
>Re-assuming my hat as a Gen-ART reviewer for this draft, I think that this
>change would be a mistake, as it no longer explicitly informs the reader
>what has been changed in RFC 3405.
>If we really want to be precise, I suggest:
>2. Updated Requirements
>This document removes the normative requirement from section 3.1.1
>of RFC 3405 for registrations in URI.ARPA to be from the IETF URI Tree.
>All registrations in URI.ARPA MUST now be for schemes which are
>permanent registrations, as they are described in BCP 35.
Sorry, I want to make my last comment more clear.
In the interest of brevity, we probably don't really need that second sentence. And its removal might help to open things up a bit. So section two would now look like:
2. Updated Requirements
This document removes the normative requirement from section 3.1.1
of RFC 3405 for registrations in URI.ARPA to be from the IETF URI Tree.
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
