Hi Dan,

> On 27 Feb 2020, at 21:31, Dan Romascanu <droma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Ragnar, for the quick answer. 
> 
> See in-line. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 6:56 PM Ragnar Sundblad <ra...@netnod.se> wrote:
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Thank you for reviewing!
> 
> On 26 Feb 2020, at 11:06, Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> > Review result: Ready with Issues
> > 
> > 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-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-22
> > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> > Review Date: 2020-02-26
> > IETF LC End Date: 2020-02-28
> > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> > 
> > Summary:
> > 
> > Ready with one minor issue to be discussed.
> > 
> > A very clear, well written, nicely organized document.
> > 
> > Major issues:
> > 
> > Minor issues:
> > 
> > 1. The tables in Sections 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 state that all undefined values in 
> > the
> > registries start immediately after the values defined by this document with
> > 'Reserved for Private and Experimental Use'. What about future extensions in
> > future versions of the document? Would not it be better to leave a range for
> > future extensions and start the values for private and experimental use 
> > farther
> > in the total spaces?
> 
> We are not sure what you mean - we believe that the tables say that the upper 
> halves of the spaces are 'Reserved for Private and Experimental Use’, while 
> the lower halves are unallocated except for those values that are specified 
> in the draft. 
> 
> Do you have an example of how you would want it to be written/formatted 
> instead?
> 
> It would be more clear if you added in the table in Section 7.6 for example: 
> 
> 8 - 16383 - Reserved for Future Standard Use

That information is in the "policy for allocation allocation of new entries" in 
a table (without frames) above the table for "the initial contents of the 
table" (with frames). I believe there was some reason for this, but I don’t 
know what it was.

I guess we have to investigate this ASAP.

> > Nits/editorial comments:
> > 
> > 1. In the (very useful) Appendix A for Terms and Abbreviations, there are a 
> > few
> > abbreviations usually considered part of the shared basis terms in IETF
> > documents (like TCP, UDP, IANA, ...)
> 
> Ok - Marcus is doing that right now.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Ragnar
> 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to