On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 22:24, Thomas Fossati <thomas.fossati@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, Christer, > > Thanks very much for your review and the suggested restyle. > > On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 17:02, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker > <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > > It is a little confusing when the updates to RFC 7252 are in the IANA > > Considerations section of the document. In addition, new procedures are added > > in Sections 5.1 and 5.2, but those should be new 12.3 subsections in RFC 7252. > > > > I suggest to have a dedicated "Updates to RFC 7252" section, where the text in > > Sections 5.1 and Sections 5.2 are also added as new Sections 12.3.1 and > > Sections 12.3.2 to RFC 7252. > > > > For example: > > > > ---- > > > > 4. Updates to RFC 7252 > > > > This Section updates Section 12.3, and adds the new Sections 12.3.1 and 12.3.2, > > to [RFC7252]. > > > > 4.1. Updates to Section 12.3 > > > > // The text in Section 5 > > > > 4.2. New Section 12.3.1 > > > > // The text in Section 5.1 > > > > 4.2. New Section 12.3.2 > > > > // The text in Section 5.2 > > > > ---- > > > > The Security Considerations then become Section 5. The IANA Considerations > > become Section 6, and there you only need to state something like: > > > > "This document updates the IANA procedures of [RFC7252] for registering CoAP > > Content-Formats." > > Where would §5.3 (Expert Review Procedure) and §5.4 (Preferred Format > for the Content Type Field) go? Just checking: is this [1] what you had in mind? [1] https://core-wg.github.io/cf-reg-update/christer-restyle/draft-ietf-core-cf-reg-update.html -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
