Thanks for the review & the edits.


On 24 Nov 2016, at 02:24, Joel Halpern <> wrote:

> The new version addresses my concerns and is ready for publication as an 
> informational RFC.
> Yours,
> Joel M. Halpern
> On 10/14/16 4:51 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>> 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
>> <>.
>> Document: draft-bbf-bbf-urn-02
>>    Uniform Resource Name (URN) Namespaces for Broadband Forum
>> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
>> Review Date: 14-October-2016
>> IETF LC End Date: 4-November-2016
>> IESG Telechat date: N/A
>> Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as an
>> Informational RFC.
>> Major issues:
>>    RFC 3406 states that the namespace considerations section should
>> indicate why a new namespace is needed.  While this is pretty obvious,
>> the text does not actually say anything in that section to explain it.
>>    In particular, I would expect that section to explain why 3 NIDs are
>> needed rather than just 1.
>> Minor issues:
>>    The template in RFC 3406 indicates the the section in each NID on
>> the Process of identifier assignment should "detail the mechanism and or
>> authorities for assigning URNs to resources."  The draft simply says
>> that the BBF will provide procedures.  Do those procedures exist?  If
>> not, there seems to be a minor problem.  If they do exist, it would seem
>> sensible to include a pointer to the place where the BBF publicly
>> documents those procedures, so that people using this information who
>> might want to register something can understand what the rules and
>> expectations are. (I realize that the RFC 6289 example this is based on
>> did not include such a pointer, which is why I am making this a minor
>> comment instead of a major one.)
>> Nits/editorial comments:
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gen-art mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Gen-art mailing list

Reply via email to