Brian, thanks for your review. I pointed to your comment in my Yes ballot as it looks like it was never addressed. Alissa > On Aug 31, 2020, at 11:23 PM, Brian Carpenter via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review result: Ready > > Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-03 > > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-hardie-dispatch-rfc3405-update-03 > Reviewer: Brian Carpenter > Review Date: 2020-09-01 > IETF LC End Date: 2020-09-24 > IESG Telechat date: > > Summary: Ready (with micro-nit) > -------- > > Nits: > ----- > >> 1. Introduction >> >> Part five of the Dynamic Delegation Discovery System (DDDS), RFC 3405 >> [RFC3405], describes the registration procedures for assignments in >> URI.ARPA. The document requires that registrations be in the "IETF >> tree" of URI registrations. The use of URI scheme name trees was >> defined in RFC 2717 [RFC2717] but discontinued by RFC 4395 [RFC4395]. >> Since the use of trees was discontinued, there is no way in the >> current process set out in BCP 35 [RFC7595] to meet the requirement. > > This is indeed a nit, but I'd prefer s/the requirement/the above requirement/. > The current text did make me briefly think "Which requirement?". > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
