Hi, I realized the question on obsoleting RFC 8110 (Q_2_1) is already discussed, so no reason for a separate thread because of my review. Regards, Christer > -----Original Message----- > From: Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, 8 August 2024 13.12 > To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx > Cc: draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx > Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of > draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02 > > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review result: Ready with Nits > > 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://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki. > ietf.org%2Fen%2Fgroup%2Fgen%2FGenArtFAQ&data=05%7C02%7Cchrister. > holmberg%40ericsson.com%7C99d27bb12a3040f12ae308dcb79297f8%7C > 92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C63858708744267201 > 2%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMz > IiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=U1r89Vzutb > %2Bjg2nvmclgiTu%2B5pMs0gyHcTwbxCQjI74%3D&reserved=0>. > > Document: draft-wkumari-rfc8110-to-ieee-02 > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review Date: 2024-08-08 > IETF LC End Date: 2024-09-04 > IESG Telechat date: 2024-09-05 > > Summary: The document is short, easy to read, only describes the transfer of > work, and is almost ready for publication. However, I have a few editorial > comments and questions that I'd like the authors to address. > > Major issues: N/A > > Minor issues: N/A > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Abstract: > --------- > > Q_A_1: > > The text says: > > "This document transfers the ongoing maintenance and further development > of the protocol to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group." > > I assume the transfer has already been done, and the document only reflects > that transfer by updating RFC8110. Could one simply say: > > "The ongoing maintenance and further development of the protocol has been > transferred to the IEEE 802.11 Working Group." > > ...followed by the "This document updates RFC8110..." paragraph. > > Section 1: > ---------- > > Q_1_1: > > Can "IEEE Std 802.11" be replaced with "[IEEE_802.11]", for consistency? > > Q_1_2: > > The text says: > > "Since publication, [RFC8110] (also known as "[Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open]") has > been widely implemented and deployed." > > It is unclear what "also known as" means, as we are talking about > publications. > Is [Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open] a copy of RFC8110? If so, could one say "also > published as [Wi-Fi_Enhanced_Open]"? > > Q_1_3: > > Not sure what is meant by the following sentence: > > "This document is a concurrence." > > Section 2: > ---------- > > Q_2_1: > > As the content and future work of 8110 is moved to IEEE, is there a reason > why > 8110 is not obsoleted? > > Q_2_2: > > Would it be useful that explicitly clarify that the future work in IEEE will > not > update RFC8110, but only the IEEE specification where the protocol will be > transferred. > > Section 3: > ---------- > > Q_3_1: > > Should the text say that future maintenance and development will apply the > security consideration processes of IEEE? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list -- gen-art@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to > gen- > art-leave@xxxxxxxx
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
-- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
