Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-art review of draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-01.txt

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:55:50 +0300

Hi,

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
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.

Draft: draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-01.txt
Reviewer: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Review Date: 13 October 2006
IETF LC Date: 9 October 2006

Summary:

This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should
be fixed before publication.

Comments:

This draft has lines and pages that are too long. Lines should not
exceed 72 characters and pages should not exceed 58 lines.

Acronyms should be expanded on their first use (e.g., AS, BGCP, RPSL).

It would be nice if the sections of the draft (excluding the Abstract)
would be numbered.

Having an example of the proposed representation in the Discussion
Section would be helpful.

The draft lacks an IANA Considerations Section.

Can an Informational RFC define a canonical representation for this type
of identifier?

The author's email address should appear in the Author's Address
Section; not in a different one.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

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

---

From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:09:47 +1000

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:55:50 +0300

> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments

sure. noted below.

> This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
> should be fixed before publication.
> 
> 
> Comments:
> 

ack. 
> Acronyms should be expanded on their first use (e.g., AS, BGCP, RPSL).

ack.

> It would be nice if the sections of the draft (excluding the Abstract)
ack.

> Section would be helpful.

ack.
> The draft lacks an IANA Considerations Section.

I added one to an aborted 02 draft. After some offline discussion, its
likely to re-appear as:

IANA Considerations:

   This document recommends changes to an existing IANA Registry, the as
   number assignments registry.
   
   This document makes changes to the IANA Considerations text in  
   [IDR4BYTES] as follows:
   
   It is recommended that upon approval of this document, the IANA will
   change the rules for representation of the assignments in the
   "AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM NUMBERS" registry located at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers

	New line in the registry will be:

	1.0 - 65535.65535 Reserved by the IANA

   maintained subsequently in the documented textual representation as
   assignmentFrom [email-masked] Fri Oct 13 20:57:44 2006
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:09:47 +1000
From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
To: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Cc: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: [Gen-art] Re: Gen-art review of
 draft-michaelson-4byte-as-representation-01.txt

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:55:50 +0300

> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments

sure. noted below.

> This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
> should be fixed before publication.
> 
> 
> Comments:
> 

ack. 
> Acronyms should be expanded on their first use (e.g., AS, BGCP, RPSL).

ack.

> It would be nice if the sections of the draft (excluding the Abstract)
ack.

> Section would be helpful.

ack.
> The draft lacks an IANA Considerations Section.

I added one to an aborted 02 draft. After some offline discussion, its
likely to re-appear as:

IANA Considerations:

   This document recommends changes to an existing IANA Registry, the as
   number assignments registry.
   
   This document makes changes to the IANA Considerations text in  
   [IDR4BYTES] as follows:
   
   It is recommended that upon approval of this document, the IANA will
   change the rules for representation of the assignments in the
   "AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM NUMBERS" registry located at
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/as-numbers

	New line in the registry will be:

	1.0 - 65535.65535 Reserved by the IANA

   maintained subsequently in the documented textual representation as
   assignments are made to the RIR.

> 
> Can an Informational RFC define a canonical representation for this
> type of identifier?

I can't answer this. What alternatives are there?

> Section; not in a different one.

ack.