> -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 9:56 AM > To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx > Cc: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx; > regext@xxxxxxxx; dromasca@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02 > > Caution: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content > is safe. > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready with Issues > > 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 > > <https://secure- > web.cisco.com/1it8MJTs4lDbEREI1LQUNZG_Vva3pasdIc3nRXd93eAnKO8pL8c > lDx4Pi8a3pUnd3OVSqlbrXmmDSW-cnl- > drNV5DHXN5gw1Npy1iJSih3_ipEMV7vNnaGP5- > xZZa3jEPY2vvgjozipMQ3VYc8FH9KLjjtG15P42IhohN4F6FNircOBH- > qBAVcH4V5Q8VuX4tccIue67ds7aJR4tEXZ3vl23e0ZnfU3MQ7ZPbsUa3PhYmfF- > HIbzG5Chx6gVnpuoOzskOilbIifyT6kuRFu54mQ/https%3A%2F%2Ftrac.ietf.org > %2Ftrac%2Fgen%2Fwiki%2FGenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7482bis-02 > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review Date: 2021-02-04 > IETF LC End Date: 2021-02-08 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: > > This Document is Ready with one issue that I would suggest to clarify and > possibly apply edits before approval. > > Major issues: > > If my understanding is correct this document together with 7483bis will > replace RFC 7482 and RFC 7483 and advance them to Internet Standard. > Sections 7 and 8 will be taken out from the final published RFC. I believe that > the relationship with RFC 7482 needs to be detailed either in the Introduction > or in a dedicated version, in order to clarify for future readers and users the > status of the 2 / > 4 documents. I also believe that a shortened version of the 'Changes from > RFC 7482' section now an Appendix should be included in the text of the > document in its final form. Dan, thanks for the review. Would you please give me a little more on what you think is needed to explain the relationship between the two documents? I can't think of much more to say beyond "7482 describes protocol queries" and "7483 describes protocol responses to the queries described in 7482", but would adding a few sentences to that effect in the Introduction do what you're suggesting? Of course, the RFC numbers will need to be updated. Scott -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
