|
Good Morning, Thank you for your comments Stewart, please see my responses below. A new version of the draft will be published shortly and will address all of the review comments that needed edits. Thanks Roger -----Original Message----- From: Stewart Bryant via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 8:57 AM To: gen-art@xxxxxxxx Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx;
draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees.all@xxxxxxxx; regext@xxxxxxxx Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-regext-epp-fees-16 Notice: This email is from an external sender. 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-epp-fees-16 Reviewer: Stewart Bryant Review Date: 2019-06-27 IETF LC End Date: 2019-07-08 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: A well written document that is ready for publication subject to a couple of clarifications Major issues: None Minor issues: ======= 2. Migrating to Newer Versions of This Extension (Note to RFC Editor: remove this section before publication as an RFC.) SB> This seems like good advice, why is it to be removed? [RDC] Agree, Note has been removed ======= Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: o Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. o Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. o Neither the name of Internet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor the names of specific contributors, may be used to endorse or promote SB> It is not clear what the purpose of this text is, whether or not it
SB>is intended to be included with each instance the technical text below. SB>If not why is the copyright not covered by the RFC boilerplate copyright text? [RDC] This verbiage has been removed. ========= 7. Security Considerations The mapping extensions described in this document do not provide any security services beyond those described by EPP [RFC5730], the EPP SB> "security services" or "security risks" [RDC] “security services” ========= Nits/editorial comments: None |
