-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Update at bottom.
Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Thanks for the review. Comments inline. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Background for those who may be unaware of GenART: >>> >>> GenART is the Area Review Team for the General Area of the IETF. >>> We advise the General Area Director (i.e. the IETF/IESG chair) by >>> providing more in depth reviews than he could do himself of documents >>> that come up for final decision in IESG telechat. I was selected >>> as the GenART member to review this document. Below is my review, >>> which was written specifically with an eye to the GenART process, but >>> since I believe that it will be useful to have these comments more >>> widely distributed, others outside the GenART group are included. >>> >>> This review was done as part of IETF Last Call. >>> >>> Review criteria: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the >>> area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes >>> would make it so?" >>> >>> This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described >>> in the review. >>> >>> Section 2.5 contains the following note: >>> >>> (Note: In pursuit of interoperability, it may be helpful to maintain >>> a registry of query types and perhaps even of keys for use in XMPP >>> query components. Given that such values will most likely be >>> specific to particular applications of XMPP rather than core to XMPP >>> itself, it seems reasonable that such a registry, if created, would >>> be maintained by the Jabber Registrar function of the Jabber Software >>> Foundation as described in [JEP-0053], rather than by the IANA. A >>> proposal for creating such a registry can be found in [JEP-0147].) >>> >>> Given the importance of interoperability to the IETF, IESG approval of this >>> draft should probably be delayed until that registry is functional so that >>> the draft can document registration requirements for query components. >>> This problem is ironically caused by XMPP's success in being used by >>> multiple independent applications (e.g., list in Section 2.1), requiring >>> a registry like this to prevent collisions among their use of URIs/IRIs. > > That seems sensible. The document that describes the proposed registry > will need to be advanced within the Jabber Software Foundation's > standards process in order to authorize creation of the registry. That > can probably be done within a month or so, in particular following a > Last Call within that process and voting by the Jabber Council as > described at <http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0001.html>. After approval of the relevant document in the JSF's standards process, the registry has been created: http://www.jabber.org/registrar/querytypes.html Peter -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEIym3NF1RSzyt3NURAuU8AJ9uKe/R8SbInPS1UcOAzGQePSicvgCgvDcV /sgqZkPqyH6jQDUMddYfpmo= =byJl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
