Last Call Review of draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12
review-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12-genart-lc-melnikov-2014-04-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 14)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2014-04-25
Requested 2014-04-16
Authors Laura Liess, Roland Jesske, Alan Johnston, Dale Worley, Paul Kyzivat
Draft last updated 2014-04-28
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -12 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -12 by Matt Lepinski (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -12 by Bert Wijnen (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Alexey Melnikov
State Completed
Review review-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12-genart-lc-melnikov-2014-04-28
Reviewed rev. 12 (document currently at 14)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2014-04-28

Review
review-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12-genart-lc-melnikov-2014-04-28

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-salud-alert-info-urns-12.txt
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 27 April 2014
IETF LC End Date: 25 April 2014
IESG Telechat date: (if known) N/A

Summary: Ready with nits/questions.


Major issues:
None

Minor issues:

13.  User Agent Behaviour

   The User Agent (UA) MUST produce a reasonable rendering regardless of
   the combination of URIs (of any schemes) in the Alert-Info header
   field.



This MUST is not well defined to be implementable. How can conformance 


or violation of this requirement can be tested? I suggest you avoid 


using RFC 2119 language here.







Has this been submitted to the urn-nid at apps.ietf.org mailing list for 2 


weeks review? (as per RFC 3406)





Nits/editorial comments:



 "REQ-4: has been deleted.  To avoid confusion, the number will not be 


reused".




 I find this to be rather unusual. Are these requirements used in RFPs?


In Section 7:

date              = [CC] YY [ "-" MM ["-" DD] ]




 Is there a need for having 2 octet years? Are you trying to save some 


bytes here at the expense of extra (albeit minor) complexity?