To:
Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
CC:
iesg@ietf.org, EPP Provreg <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From:
Olafur Gudmundsson <ogud@ogud.com>
Date:
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:33:50 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<4B8F9F5A.2090908@isode.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
Subject:
[ietf-provreg] Re: RFC4310bis document writeup
On 04/03/2010 6:54 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > Hi Olafur, > > Olafur Gudmundsson wrote: > [...] > >> (1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the >> document satisfies all ID nits? (See the Internet-Drafts Checklist >> and http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Boilerplate checks are >> not enough; this check needs to be thorough. Has the document >> met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB >> Doctor, media type and URI type reviews? >> >> There are few nits due to the ever changing boilerplates and tools not >> being available when BP changes :-(. >> >> I found one minor error in section 4.1. cites RFC3757 but should use the >> document that obsoleted it, RFC4034. > > If I remember correctly I've asked authors about this before starting > IETF LC and they said it was intentional. > > > IMHO I do not understand why they want to treat RFC3757 differently from RFC3658 as both are obsoleted by RFC403[345]. If the RFC3757 reference stands then I need to change my write-up to say there is a possible downref as Obsolete RFC is used and editors will have to provide downref justification. If there is particular text in RFC3757 that the editors want to cite, an explicit informative reference can be added but the main citation is changed to RFC403[45]. Olafur -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- List run by majordomo software. For (Un-)subscription and similar details send "help" to ietf-provreg-request@cafax.se