[apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08
Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info> Wed, 29 February 2012 21:52 UTC
Return-Path: <jyee@afilias.info>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4912221E8054 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.265
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GVf5-ezgqlTr for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outbound.afilias.info (outbound.afilias.info [69.46.124.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3DE21E8035 for <Apps-Discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ms5.yyz2.afilias-ops.info ([10.50.129.111] helo=smtp.afilias.info) by outbound.afilias.info with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <jyee@afilias.info>) id 1S2rS3-0007lK-8i for Apps-Discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:52:47 +0000
Received: from mail-tul01m020-f178.google.com ([209.85.214.178]) by smtp.afilias.info with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <jyee@afilias.info>) id 1S2rS2-0004lh-6R for Apps-Discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:52:47 +0000
Received: by obbuo19 with SMTP id uo19so4613284obb.9 for <Apps-Discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.50.203.33 with SMTP id kn1mr190723igc.1.1330552366250; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.103] (69-196-170-240.dsl.teksavvy.com. [69.196.170.240]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id az9sm17811639igb.2.2012.02.29.13.52.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:52:45 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
From: Joseph Yee <jyee@afilias.info>
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:52:39 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <227F0E4C-B601-4872-8231-D0FFC37F9FA0@afilias.info>
To: Apps-Discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0.all@tools.ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkdVQTcY/npsLjb7rGKY+NZcAqDE7PSMSmSbPxUYJ2mqjk/otnMhRf83U6Sd/mEnBr5HFTb
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:52:50 -0000
Resend after multiple bad errors, sorry ---- I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this draft (for background on appsdir, please see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-dnsext-rfc2671bis-edns0-08 Title: Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) Reviewer: Joseph Yee Review Date: Feb 29, 2012 Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standard Standard RFC but has a few issues that should be fixed before publication Major Issues: none Minor Issues: (1) Although no negative impact from the lack of mention in the draft, Binary Label in IANA should change its status to obsolete (or historic or just remove the entry?). (2) The paragraph in section 10 (8th paragraph from page 13) is hard to read. I'm debated whether to put this into minor or nits. I don't see negative impact keeping it as is, but recommend to improve it if possible. Nits: (1) typo at section 10, 6th paragraph (or 3rd paragraph from page 13) original "IANA is advised to udpates reference...." s/udpates/updates/