Re: [Ltru] draft-ietf-ltru-matching-02

["Mark Davis" <mark.davis at jtcsv.com>]

Huh? I would object to that. The matching document has had not nearly the
same review, nor has the same timetable in the charter.

‎Mark

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frank Ellermann" <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>
To: <ltru at ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 15:13
Subject: [Ltru] draft-ietf-ltru-matching-02


> Hi, if Randy really wants to "last call" the matching draft
> together with the registry draft it's time to find some nits:
>
> - the references are still messy (2234 instead of 2234bis,
>   normative IANA MoU, unreferenced [2], [3], [4], [6], [7],
>   [8], [9], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], {18],
>   [20] ).
>
> - the credits are dubious, IIRC only Doug, Ira, Ned, John,
>   and Randy contributed to the matching draft (and Ira isn't
>   listed).
>
> - chapter 5 is apparently a copy from the registry draft.
>   A simple pointer "security considerations are discussed in
>   [draft-ietf-ltru-registry]" is better.
>
> - chapter 6 is apparently a copy from the registry draft, it
>   could be deleted.  Probably this kills some more references.
>
> - chapter 4 says "this is the first version of this document".
>   But its draft -02, not -00.
>
> - chapter 3 doesn't appear in the order recommended in draft
>   rfc-editor-rfc2223bis-08 (Acknowledgements, Security, IANA).
>   I've seen Bruce check this, and I got this "wrong" elsewhere.
>
> - The "Abstract" contains references, but that's not allowed.
>   The XML input is apparently invalid, for a nice validator
>   see also <http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/xml2rfc-valid/>.
>   No, I'm not joking, I discussed this on the xml2rfc list.
>
> - For the author's addresses I'd add some corresponding URLs,
>   e.g. <http://www.inter-locale.com/> - no idea for Mark, IBM
>   URLs are in permanent flux...
>
>   ...one hour later, <http://purl.net/net/cp> and queries like
>   <http://purl.net/net/cp/858> work again.  Grmbl.
>
> - The intro defines unused keywords REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT,
>   and OPTIONAL.  Bruce checks this.
>
> - chapter 2.1.1 mentions en-DE-boont, that's an odd example
>   for matching.
>
> - chapter 2.1.2 says *[ "-" extlang ]
>   Bill's checker proposes *( "-" extlang )
>   We want *3( "-" extlang )
>
>   It also says ( "x" / "X" ) instead of "x".  Same problem in
>   the registry draft, AFAIK ("x"/"X") should be "x", reported
>   several times here.
>
> Obscure ABNF issues => TILT, I don't look any further, bye.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ltru mailing list
> Ltru at lists.ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru
>
>



_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru