Subject: [apps-discuss] Volunteer needed for media type ISE review

From: Sean Leonard <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 23:20:06 -0700

Hi Folks:

A volunteer reviewer is needed for the text/nfo media type Independent 
Submission (draft-seantek-text-nfo). If you're willing to help review 
it, please let me know.

Thank you,

Sean

---

From: t.petch <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:29:18 +0100

Sean

I think that you will need more Security Considerations to make this
acceptable.  Looking at that section for other Media Types, they mostly
say something about the lack of confidentiality, integrity and so on,
while this I-D explicitly mentions the ambiguity of some code points
which to me says 'easy phishing'.

That apart,

s.2 'including perhaps null' should come off the fence, and say, eg,
'including null'!

'   Published specification: This specification.' will not be so helpful
when it is published.  Suggest a Note to the RFC Editor to insert the
RFC number here

s.3 ' NFO is  encoded in the latter, ' doesn't really parse for me as
there do not seem to be two alternative encodings in the previous
sentence.

s.3.1 '   The codes in the 20-7E range correspond to US-ASCII and
IBM437.' seems a bit sparse - 'correspond to the same codes in ...' or
just 'are the same as in'

This use of correspond occurs several times and I would change them all

'ROM graphemes.'  Read Only Memory? expand on first use

s.3.2 'The codes in the 80-AF range are a selection of non-US-English
text
   characters; they correspond to IBM437.'

Correspond again and while they are mostly non-US English text, not all
are e.g. x'BC'

s.3.7  this template corresponds to RFC2978 but I note that IANA has a
few extra fields.    Doubtless the Expert Reviewer will ask for them if
needed.

3.5 Better to be explicit that it is the 'Media Types' registry that is
the intended destination.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sean Leonard" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:20 AM