Re: Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis-07: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi Alexey,

The IANA Considerations used to be a copy of RFC 5204 but someone
asked that it be cleaned up. I will copy it back in the next revision.

Thanks.

--julien


On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis-07: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The IANA considerations section does not seem to stand alone without
> reading RFC 5204. As you are obsoleting RFC 5204, readers shouldn't be
> expected to read it in order to discover original IANA instructions.
> I think you should copy information from RFC 5204.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> In Section 6:
>
>    This section is to be interpreted according to the Guidelines for
>    Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs [RFC5226].
>
> This sentence is not needed, because RFC 5204 didn't define any
> registries, so none of the text from RFC 5226 applies. I suggest you
> delete this sentence.
>
>