Last Call Review of draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-04
review-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-04-genart-lc-gurbani-2019-08-13-00

Request Review of draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-08-30
Requested 2019-08-02
Authors John Klensin, Asmus Freytag
Draft last updated 2019-08-13
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Paul Wouters
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Vijay Gurbani (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Vijay Gurbani
State Completed
Review review-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-04-genart-lc-gurbani-2019-08-13
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/n1c7peE4i0lpM2cYFD-fdpANdRk
Reviewed rev. 04 (document currently at 05)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2019-08-13

Review
review-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-04-genart-lc-gurbani-2019-08-13

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 treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-klensin-idna-rfc5891bis-??
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: 2019-08-13
IETF LC End Date: 2019-08-30
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This document is ready for publication as proposed standard, but has a couple of nits as detailed below.

Major issues: 0

Minor issues: 0

Nits/editorial comments: 2

- Section 2, last paragraph: "By necessity, the latter ...", here, "latter" probably
 refers to "protocol restrictions".  However, I am not sure whether the rest of
 the sentence ("...the latter are somewhat generic, having to ...") refers to
 protocol restrictions or registry restrictions.  It seems to me that the rest
 of the sentence is referring to registry restrictions, in which case,
 s/latter/former/.

- Section 8: s/Faltstrom/Falstrom/

Thank you.