Re: [Last-Call] Artart last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements-12

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Duane,

On 9/7/21 12:48 PM, Wessels, Duane wrote:


On Sep 3, 2021, at 5:29 PM, Jean Mahoney via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

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: Jean Mahoney
Review result: Ready with Nits

Reviewer: Jean Mahoney
Review result: Ready with nits

A well-written, easy-to-read document.  Love Appendix A!

Jean,

Thank you for the review and kind words.


Question about Appendix A.2 and Updates - Should this document also update RFC
1536?

Current text in A.2:
   The informational document [RFC1536] states UDP is the "chosen
   protocol for communication though TCP is used for zone transfers."
   That statement should now be considered in its historical context and
   is no longer a proper reflection of modern expectations.

Seems reasonable to consider, assuming a BCP can update an Informational RFC?

Any RFC can update any previous RFC? There are some questions about the use of "Updates" (see draft-kuehlewind-update-tag); different WGs use it for different things. If you are trying to catch the eye of implementers, maybe it would help, but perhaps ask your AD.





Nits:

General - Document status (Informational, Standards Track, etc.) should be
capitalized, and Standards Track is not hyphenated (There's just one instance
of hyphenation).

Section 2.4 - 35%of / 35% of

There is an embedded XML comment in the source and apparently it renders inconsistently.
I've added more whitespace so it should be fixed regardless.


Section 3 - transport.[TDNS] / transport [TDNS].

Fixed.


Section 5.1
   Current: "the steady-state of lost resources as a result is a 'DNS wedgie'."
   Perhaps: "the steady state of the resulting lost resources is a 'DNS
   wedgie'."

Yes, thank you.


Section 5.2 - Expand the acronym KSK.

Done.



Section 7 - The Acknowledgments section should be located just above the
Authors' Addresses section. It looks like the names are supposed to be in
alphabetical order, but they aren't quite.

I moved it to the end of <middle> in the XML source.



Section 9 - fragmenetation / fragmentation

Fixed.



Section 10 -  Since DNS over UDP and TCP use  / Since DNS over UDP and TCP uses

Fixed.



Section 11.2 - [ROLL_YOU_ROOT] has a mangled author name and a TBD.

The TBD is fixed.  The author names look fine to me, but maybe "M&uuml;ller" isn't
rendering properly for everyone?  If thats not it then I'll need you to be more
specific.

The issue is seen in the PDF: Müller
https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements-12.pdf







Appendix A - The construction "The [RFCNNNN] document..." (in A.3, A.4, A.5,
A.7, and A.13) reads oddly to me. Perhaps "This document [RFCNNNN] ".

Agreed.  These have been changed.


Appendix A.8 - The verb tenses are mixed in this section.

Fixed.



Appendix A.32 - as a a / as a

Fixed.



There are other nits I could pick more easily if this doc was in a GitHub repo.
They can be left to the RPC to clean up. :-)


FYI it is in github and I have a pull request for your review at https://github.com/jtkristoff/draft-ietf-dnsop-dns-tcp-requirements/pull/8

I've reviewed the PR. Thanks for making the changes!

Best regards,

Jean



DW


_______________________________________________
art mailing list
art@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art


--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux