Hi - I'd like to thank everyone who took the time to review http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-registry-12.txt and http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ltru-initial-04.txt We appreciate the thoughtful comments and discussion. The IETF last call comments touched on several issues the working group had previously discussed, as well as bringing up some new ones. I'd like to single out the GenART reviewer, Elwyn Davies, for particularly helpful comments, and John Klensin for the BCP discussion. The WG agreed to several changes to the drafts. For the most part, these were clarifications or correction of omissions that were readily agreed. There were, in my assessment, no substantive changes. The most difficult discussion was the question of whether the plan to recommend the registry description document for BCP, with the initial registry contents published as an informational RFC. The working group's plan for the registry description document remains the same, but we accepted the suggestion to include in the initial registry document a note to the RFC editor requestion the removal of the content from section 3. What would remain of this informational document would be the description of how the initial registry was generated and other historical background, but nothing that could be mistaken for the registry itself would remain. The new issues entered into the issue tracker at https://rt.psg.com/ (user and password are ietf) are: 1107 IETF/LC Transition rules (gen-art 1) resolved 1108 IETF/LC Recall of the LSR (gen-art 2) resolved 1109 IETF/LC case canonicalization in registry (gen-art 3) resolved 1110 IETF/LC define the LSR (gen-art 4) resolved 1111 IETF/LC documenting the update load (gen-art 5) rejected 1112 IETF/LC various casing issues (gen-art 7) rejected 1113 IETF/LC UN economic groupings (gen-art 8) rejected 1114 IETF/LC define the LSR (gen-art 9) resolved 1115 IETF/LC numeric ranges in the registry (gen-art 11) resolved 1116 IETF/LC maintain registration records for every single subtag (gen-art 10) resolved 1117 IETF/LC include 'grandfathered' ANBF in 'Tag' description (gen-art 12) resolved 1118 IETF/LC remove MUST from capitalization in registry requirements (gen-art 14) rejected 1119 IETF/LC give ABNF for Prefix (gen-art 15) rejected 1120 IETF/LC ungarble description of Preferred-Value (gen-art 16a) resolved 1121 IETF/LC case of the subtag in a registration (gen-art 16b) 1122 IETF/LC what happens when GF tag and new registration with different meaning collide (gen-art 17a) resolved 1123 IETF/LC make hypothetical nature of extlang registrations clear (gen-art 17b) resolved 1124 IETF/LC At least one prefix for variant (gen-art 18) resolved 1125 IETF/LC bad GF sentence in S3.2 resolved 1126 IETF/LC another GF text problem resolved 1127 IETF/LC choice of subtags in multilingual documents (gen-art 19) rejected 1128 IETF/LC clarifying what a redundant tag is (gen-art 20) resolved 1129 IETF/LC frowning on long texts (gen-art #21) resolved 1130 IETF/LC remove rules in section 2 duplicated from registry draft rejected 1131 IETF/LC update entry for zh-guoyu rejected 1135 IETF/LC something other than BCP? resolved 1136 IETF/LC add singleton for tag URIs rejected I'm note including here the (rather lengthy) list of issues that the WG had already discussed. There was not WG support for the re-opening of those issues, as no new considerations or concerns were introduced. I'm hereby asking the editors of the two documents to submit revised i-ds incorporating the agreed changes, along with any incidental editorial items they might have found. If they feel the need to run any specific wordings past the WG, they should feel free to do so. Thanks again to all who have spent so much time and energy on this effort. Randy Presuhn, ltru co-chair & document shepherd _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf