On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Ben Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > Document: draft-bryan-metalinkhttp-22 > Reviewer: Ben Campbell > Review Date: 2011-03-15 > IESG Telechat date: 2011-03-17 > > Summary: This draft is essentially ready for publication as a proposed > standard. I have a couple of remaining minor comments that may be worth > considering, but probably should not block the draft's progress > > Note: This is a followup from my Telechat review of version 21 (see below), > which mostly applies to version 22 except for on editorial fix, which I have > ellided. > > On Mar 1, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Ben Campbell wrote: > >> 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd >> or AD before posting a new version of the draft. >> >> Document: draft-bryan-metalinkhttp-21 >> Reviewer: Ben Campbell >> Review Date: 2011-03-01 >> IETF LC End Date: >> IESG Telechat date: 2011-03-03 >> >> Summary: This draft is essentially ready for publication as a proposed >> standard. I have a couple of remaining comments that may be worth >> considering, but probably should not block the draft's progress. >> >> Major issues: >> >> None. >> >> Minor issues: >> >> -- I note that the draft still suggests that servers SHOULD share an eTag >> generation policy, but does not offer a baseline policy that servers either >> SHOULD or MUST implement. I still have a mild concern that implementations >> might have non-intersecting sets of policy options. On the other hand, I >> realize that coming up with (i.e. agreeing to) a baseline policy is not a >> trivial effort in itself, so I don't think this should block publication. I >> mention it merely for the sake of completeness.
thanks for mentioning it. >> >> Nits/editorial comments: >> >> -- section 2, last paragraph "Metalink clients use the mirrors provided by a >> Metalink server in Link header fields [ RFC5988 ] but it is restricted to >> the initial Metalink server they contacted. " >> >> s /"... it is restricted..." / "... this is restricted ..." >> fixed. thanks, Ben! -- (( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ] )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
