Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01.txt

From: "Tom-PT Taylor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:44:29 -0400

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for 
draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01.txt.

For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at 
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments 
you may receive.

This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track document, 
except that it lacks RFC 2119 language and capitalization. I am not sure 
whether IESG practice requires RFC 2119 to be applied in a document such 
as this.

I have one editing suggestion. Section 2 makes a sudden transition from 
background to intent of the present document. I had to read a second 
time to realize that "This document" after the last quotation block 
refers to draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01.txt, not the document just 
cited. Perhaps you might want to make that "The present document" instead.

Tom Taylor

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Geoff Huston <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 09:27:10 +1000

At 04:44 AM 8/06/2006, Tom-PT Taylor wrote:

>I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01.txt.
>
>Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you 
>may receive.
>
>This draft is ready for publication as a Standards Track document, except 
>that it lacks RFC 2119 language and capitalization. I am not sure whether 
>IESG practice requires RFC 2119 to be applied in a document such as this.
>
>background to intent of the present document. I had to read a second time 
>to realize that "This document" after the last quotation block refers to 
>draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01.txt, not the document just cited. 
>Perhaps you might want to make that "The present document" instead.

the latter is probably best handled by the RFC editor. I'll take advice on 
SHOULD vs should, etc as I'm unsure myself in this context

thanks indeed for spending the time undertaking this review

   Geoff