Subject: [xmpp] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-23: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 06:38:52 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis-23: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

= Section 6.1 =
"Because this document obsoletes RFC 6122,
   which registered the "Nodeprep" and "Resourceprep" profiles, IANA is
   requested at the least to mark those profiles as not current
   (preferably with a pointer to this document)."

"At the least" implies that IANA may take some further action at its own
discretion, which doesn't seem right. I would suggest deleting that
phrase.

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2015 11:46:33 -0600

Hi Alissa, thanks for the review. Comments inline.

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xmpp-6122bis/

Good catch. We had some discussion at one point about modifying the IANA 
Stringprep Profiles registry [1] so information other than the "current 
version indicator" (RFC 3454) could be included. We reached the 
conclusion that this was more trouble than it was worth.

Let's remove the "at the least" text before publication.

Peter

[1] 
http://www.iana.org/assignments/stringprep-profiles/stringprep-profiles.xhtml