Subject: [xmpp] AD Evaluation: draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-22

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 16:29:28 -0500

Hi,

This is my AD evaluation of draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-22. I think this is 
ready for IETF last call, and will start that shortly.

I have only one comment of any substance:

-- section 3.1, 4 paragraphs from the end makes normative statements 
about the minimum and maximum length for each part of a JID. But the 
sections for each part repeat those statements, creating redundant 
normative language. I don't see disagreements between the sections, but 
it would still be better to avoid the redundancy.

Thanks!

Ben.

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 15:16:30 -0700

> ready for IETF last call, and will start that shortly.

Thanks, Ben.

> it would still be better to avoid the redundancy.

How about this change to remove the normative statement in §3.1?

OLD
    Each allowable portion of a JID (localpart, domainpart, and
    resourcepart) MUST NOT be zero octets in length and MUST NOT be more
    than 1023 octets in length, resulting in a maximum total size
    (including the '@' and '/' separators) of 3071 octets.

NEW
    Each allowable portion of a JID (localpart, domainpart, and
    resourcepart) is from 1 to 1023 octets in length, resulting in a
    maximum total size (including the '@' and '/' separators) of 3071
    octets.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/

---

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 23:05:30 -0500

>  maximum total size (including the '@' and '/' separators) of 3071

That WFM. I suggest dealing with that when you deal with any IETF last 
call feedback.

Thanks!

Ben.

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 22:52:26 -0700

> That WFM. I suggest dealing with that when you deal with any IETF last

Ack. Will do.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/