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-ippm-metric-registry-??
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date: 2019-10-29
IETF LC End Date: 2019-11-06
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:
The document is almost ready for publication as a BCP document

Major issues:

Minor issues:
1. From reading the document it looks to me that the registration policy  should be specification required which also requires expert review.
2. My understanding is that for registration a document is required , not necessarily and RFC, but in multiple places in the document ( 7.3, 7.3.1, 8.2 ,...) the text talks about RFC and not document.
3. I am not sure if section 6 is needed in the published document based on its content. If it will remain then in 6.1 first paragraph the reference should be to section 5 and not to section 6.
4. In sections 10.2 and 10.3 there are guidance taken from this document. I think that the for IANA it should say in the registry note that the registration must comply with RFCXXX (this document), I assume that there is no need to repeat all this text in these sections in the registry note.


Nits/editorial comments: