Sheng: Thanks for the review. > Reviewer: Sheng Jiang > Review result: Has Nits > > I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing > effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments > were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF > drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD > reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat > these comments just like any other last call comments. > > Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc3709bis-06 > Reviewer: Sheng Jiang > Review Date: 2022-10-30 > > This document combines RFC3709 and RFC6170 and obsoletes them. This document is > well written. It is almost Ready with minor Nits: > > draft-ietf-httpbis-semantics has been published as RFC 9110. Thanks. I've updated the reference. > Normative reference to an Informational RFC1952. This is not a problem because RFC 1952 is already in the downref repository. > One more consideration: this document adds a new object identifier. > Technically, it is fine. However, it is defined/appeared only in an Appendix. I > am not sure this is procedurely right or not. Should not it at least be > mentioned/defined in the main text? Appendix A.1 contains ASN.1 modules with 1988 syntax. Appendix A.2 contains an ASN.1 module with 2002 syntax. It produces the say bits on the wire as the modules that use the old syntax. The new object identifier does not impact the bits on the wire, it just names the module. I do not think this point needs t be discussed in the body except in the IANA considerations. Russ -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
