[regext] AD Evaluation: draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance

[Murray S. Kucherawy]

Hi all,

This is my AD review for draft-ietf-regext-epp-registry-maintenance.

General:

The use of "maintenance" in this document is sometimes awkward to me,
especially in its plural form.  For instance, the first sentence of the
introduction includes "conduct maintenances", which reads oddly.  I think I
would suggest "conduct maintenance", and change "upcoming maintenances" to
"upcoming maintenance events" (as was done in Section 3.3) or "upcoming
maintenance windows".

Abstract:

Should "registry's" perhaps be "registries" or "a registry's"?

Actually perhaps this is a better solution:

NEW:
This document describes an Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP) extension
called "Registry Maintenance Notifications", used by EPP clients and
servers to notify each other about maintenance events.
(END)

Section 1:

I can't quite parse this sentence:

   This mapping provides a
   mechanism by which EPP servers may notify and EPP clients to query
   upcoming maintenances.

Section 2 starts talking about particular EPP elements and commands.  I
think Section 1 should include a normative reference to EPP or some other
document where these are defined.

Section 3.2: "All dates and times attribute values ..." -- s/dates and
times/date and time/

Section 3.3: What does "the name of the maintenance" mean?  Is this
something like a headline or title, or a more complete description?

Also Section 3.3: If there might ever be a need to add more pollType
values, or deprecate one of the ones listed, you might want to consider
creating a registry for them.  If not, this whole document needs to be
updated or revised to include the new values.  I have the same question
about "", "", "", and all of
the others whose possible values are expressly enumerated.

Also Section 3.3: For "", what is "ote"?

Also Section 3.3: In the examples, the "" seems to be a UUID.  Is
this at the discretion of the implementation (i.e., any format for the
identifier is fine), or should this be constrained explicitly here?

Thank you for including Section 8.

-MSK
___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext

Re: [regext] EXTENDED Re: WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-regext-rfc7484bis-03

[James Galvin]

For the record, this WG LAST CALL is closed and the consensus of the working 
group is to submit the document to the IESG for advancement as a Full Internet 
Standard.

There are 5 supporters, not including the author and document shepherd: Mario 
Loffredo, Scott Hollenbeck, Hugo Salgad, Rick Wilhelm, Jothan Frakes.

A revised version of the document with the following changes is needed in order 
to submit it for publication.

1. As suggested by Scott Hollenbeck, please update the Section 2 boilerplate 
with the updated BCP14 reference.

2. Please update the references to RFC7482 and RFC7483 to RFC9082 and RFC9083, 
respectively.

With those changes, draft-ietf-regext-rfc7484bis-04 can be submitted to the 
IESG for consideration as a Full Internet Standard.

Jim




On 3 May 2021, at 9:31, James Galvin wrote:

> We are extending this LAST CALL until 10 May 2021.
>
> As this document is advancing to Internet Standard from Proposed Standard, we 
> require substantial support from the working group before supporting it for 
> publication.
>
> We have 3 indications of support: Mario Loffredo, Scott Hollenbeck, and 
> Jasdip Singh.  We would like at least two more.
>
> Please do indicate your support or any questions you might have about 
> advancing this document.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoin and Jim
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Apr 2021, at 9:33, James Galvin wrote:
>
>> This is a reminder that the WG LAST CALL is still open and will expire on 26 
>> April 2021.
>>
>> Please do indicate your support or any questions you might have about 
>> advancing this document.
>>
>> Please note: as this document is currently a Proposed Standard and is 
>> advancing to an Internet Standard, we will require substantial support from 
>> the working group in order to submit this document to the IESG.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Antoin and Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12 Apr 2021, at 9:20, James Galvin wrote:
>>
>>> The following working group document is believed to be ready for submission 
>>> to the IESG for publication as an Internet Standard:
>>>
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rfc7484bis/
>>>
>>> Please note: This specification is currently a Proposed Standard.  It is 
>>> advancing to an Internet Standard.  It is important that the working group 
>>> show support for this advancement.  The chairs will be looking for this 
>>> support.
>>>
>>> This WG LAST CALL will end at close of business, Monday, 26 April 2021.
>>>
>>> Please review this document and indicate your support (a simple “+1” is 
>>> sufficient) or concerns with the publication of this document by replying 
>>> to this message on the list.
>>>
>>> The document shepherd for this document is Jasdip Singh.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Antoin and Jim

___
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext