Re: [regext] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-org-10

["Linlin Zhou" <zhoulinlin@xxxxxxxx>]

Dear Stewart,

Thanks for your review. Please see my feedbacks below.

Regards,

Linlin

---

Linlin Zhou

 

From: Stewart Bryant

Date: 2018-10-09 00:52

To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx

CC: draft-ietf-regext-org..all; ietf; regext

Subject: [regext] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-org-10

Reviewer: Stewart Bryant

Review result: Ready with Issues

 

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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

 

Document: draft-ietf-regext-org-10

Reviewer: Stewart Bryant

Review Date: 2018-10-08

IETF LC End Date: 2018-10-08

IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

 

Summary:

 

This is a well written document, and ready for publication.

 

Major issues: None

 

Minor issues:

The RFC 2718 normative reference is a bit strange to one that does not normally

work in this area. RFC 2718 has been obsoleted, and this is covered by it being

called out in the IETF LC. However RFC 2718 is called out because the text

requires a reference to UTF-16, and there is apparently no reference to it

other than the obsolete RFC 2718 text. This makes me wonder why this document

requires support of the format.

[Linlin] Sorry. It should be RFC2781 and will be moved to "Informative References".

 

Perhaps a comment on this might be useful to other puzzled readers.

 

In Section  3.6 the text says: "Loops SHOULD be prohibited."

[Linlin] Will be modified as "MUST".

 

I am surprised this is not a MUST, since SHOULD means that clients need to make

the test whenever they used the repository and were worried about this, whereas

MUST would mean that the server makes the test once.

 

Nits/editorial comments:

 

Nits points out an issue with the RFC2119 boiler plate and also a line too

long, but these will be fixed by the RFC Editor as a matter of course.

[Linlin] I found there are two lines are two long. They will be put into two lines, like,

S: <msg lang="en">Command completed successfully; 

S:   action pending</msg>

 

 

_______________________________________________

regext mailing list

regext@xxxxxxxx

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext