Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-lemonade-architecture-03.txt

From: "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:44:39 +0200

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.

Document: draft-ietf-lemonade-architecture-03.txt
Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Review Date: 2008-10-21
IETF LC End Date: 2008-10-27

Summary: A major question of the usefulness of this document is raised. 
If this issue can be addressed, the document is ready for publication as 
an Informational RFC.

Comments:

- The document is well written and clear. However, I have a major 
problem because I haven't found the usefulness of this document. For 
sure we can write and publish hundreds of documents in the IETF, but if 
they aren't useful, it's a waste of time for everyone. I am sorry to say 
that I include this ID as one of these documents. In particular, I 
haven't found answers to these questions:

- What is the purpose of this document?
- What is the benefit of this document to the community?
- Why do you think someone familiar with the OMA Mobile Email 
architecture will ever read this document?
- Who is the target audience of this document?

I haven't found answers to these questions, and that makes me feel that 
the document is useless. However, the document is also harmless.

My recommendation is to add a lot of motivation around the questions 
that I have raised. This will certainly help to position the document 
with the right audience.

- Other than that, I just have a couple of nits:
  + Expand abbreviations at first occurrence: OMA, WG.
  + As a matter of taste, I don't like to mention names of working 
groups in IETF documents, since working groups sooner or later 
disappear, making the permanent RFCs look like old.

/Miguel

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia
+34-91-339-3608
Ericsson Spain
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:03:57 -0400

No worries - thanks for the review!

The target is the OMA. In a sense, you "got it in one" - this document  
is all of the OMA stuff pulled out of the other documents so they are  
not polluted. The OMA asked for it, so they are getting it.

It is an IETF document, and I guess we have been too close to it to  
read it in a pure IETF perspective. Thus we really will need to (and  
will) put it in the motivation part.

Thanks again!
--
- Eric

On Oct 21, 2008, at 4:44 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:

> Summary: A major question of the usefulness of this document is  
> raised. If this issue can be addressed, the document is ready for  
> publication as an Informational RFC.
>
> Comments:
>
> sure we can write and publish hundreds of documents in the IETF, but  
> if they aren't useful, it's a waste of time for everyone. I am sorry  
> to say that I include this ID as one of these documents. In  
> particular, I haven't found answers to these questions:
>
> I haven't found answers to these questions, and that makes me feel  
> that the document is useless. However, the document is also harmless.
>
> that I have raised. This will certainly help to position the  
> document with the right audience.
>