On 7/28/17 7:23 PM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
Hi Paul,
Regarding the reference to RFC 4572, the new text in section 10.2.1 references
RFC 4572. We earlier agreed we were not going to update that text, and keep an
informative reference to RFC 4572.
OK, I guess I remember that now. Is it considered acceptable to issue a
new document with a reference to an obsolete document when it isn't to
highlight a difference from the current document?
Since this is a review for the teleconference, I'll just leave that for
the IESG folk to decide.
Thanks,
Paul
Regards,
Christer
-----Original Message-----
From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 29 July 2017 01:07
To: Paul Kyzivat <[email protected]>;
[email protected]
Cc: General Area Review Team <[email protected]>; IETF MMUSIC WG
<[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-27
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the review. I'll fix references.
Regards,
Christer
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 28 July 2017 04:01
To: [email protected]
Cc: General Area Review Team <[email protected]>; IETF MMUSIC WG
<[email protected]>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-27
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team
(Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new
version of the draft. For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-27
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2017-07-07
IETF LC End Date: 2017-07-24
IESG Telechat date: 2017-08-15
Summary:
This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that should be
fixed before publication.
(These nits were reported by IdNits. I apologize for not noticing these during
my Last Call review.)
Issues:
Major: 0
Minor: 0
Nits: 2
(1) NIT: Unused Reference: 'RFC5245' is defined on line 1065, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
This is now redundant because all the references in the text have been changed
to draft-ietf-ice-rfc5245bis.
(2) NIT: Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4572
This is now obsolete because it has been replaced by RFC8122. This draft should
now be referencing that.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
