Last Call Review of draft-ietf-precis-framework-15
review-ietf-precis-framework-15-opsdir-lc-wicinski-2014-05-03-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-precis-framework
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 23)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2014-04-22
Requested 2014-04-14
Other Reviews Genart Last Call review of -15 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -22 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -15 by Charlie Kaufman (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Tim Wicinski
Review review-ietf-precis-framework-15-opsdir-lc-wicinski-2014-05-03
Posted at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ops-dir/current/msg00276.html
Reviewed rev. 15 (document currently at 23)
Review result Ready
Draft last updated 2014-05-03
Review completed: 2014-05-03

Review
review-ietf-precis-framework-15-opsdir-lc-wicinski-2014-05-03

Day(s) Late, I have reviewed this document as  part of the Operational 


directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being 


processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the 


benefit of the operational area directors. Document editors and WG 


chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments.




Summary: Ready



This document was revised during the review cycle - I began with -15 and 


finished with -16.  A few of the changes cleared up notes I had made 


during the review. There also has been some strong last minute 


discussion on this document, so I suspect the larger consensus is still 


being addressed.






This document is taking RFC 3454, which created the first framework for 


Unicode text strings (aka 'stringprep').  Both this draft and the 


original RFC were fairly involved which took some time to work through 


all the documents to gain a better understanding.






Operationally, this draft will create three new IANA registries to 


complement the Stringprep Profiles registry which currently exist.  IANA 


registries can have some operational impact, though this reviewer finds 


it unlikely these will cause any impact.






Appendix A describes a Codepoint Table.  It states the included table is 


"...non-normative and is included only for illustrative purposes..."


The table is *30 pages long*, and it should be either removed or 


shortened since it is "only for illustrative purposes".




tim