Re: WG Last Call on URP I-D

I think the editors need to review the document to
ensure all necessary normative references are in
place.  The document appears to be dependent on
LCUP (for entryUUID) and a variety of other LDUP
documents but contains no reference to them.  I note
as well that no other LDUP document formally references
this specification.

As such, I am unsure of the context in which this
specification is meant to be used and hence find it
hard to perform a complete review.

I note the only context I have from the I-D is LDAPv3
and X.500, both which provide no support for multiple
master replication and, hence, have no need for such
procedures.  It seems the Abstract and Introduction
need more work to detail the context in which this
specification is used.

Kurt

At 06:30 AM 8/13/2001, Christopher Apple wrote:
>The purpose of this message is to initiate the LDUP
>Working Group last call on the LDUP Update
>Reconciliation Procedures I-D document.
>
>WHAT DOCUMENT?
>
>The document in last call is:
>
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ldup-urp-04.txt
>
>WHAT IS A LAST CALL FOR?
>
>The purpose of the working group last call is to ensure
>that the working group has reached consensus on the
>document, believes that all the known outstanding issues
>have been addressed, and is ready to put the document
>forward for proposed standard status.
>
>During the last call, any comments on the documents are
>collected and discussed on the mailing list.
>
>HOW LONG DOES IT LAST?
>
>The last call starts today and will last approximately three
>weeks. It will end on Tuesday, September 4, 2001 at 1830 US ET.
>
>WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP?
>
>After the last call completes, there are three possible
>outcomes:
>
>1) No changes are required and we request our ADs to put
>   forward the documents to the IESG for proposed standard
>   status.
>
>2) Minor changes agreed to on the list are required, and
>   the documents are revised. We then ask our ADs to put
>   forward the revised documents to the IESG for
>   proposed standard status.
>
>3) Major issues are raised and no consensus is reached on
>   the list. In this case, we discuss things until consensus
>   is reached, at which time another working group last call
>   will be issued.
>
>Assuming we achieve outcome 1) or 2), and that the ADs
>agree with our assessment, the next stop for the documents
>is with the IESG. The IESG reads them and may approve the
>documents (with or without changes), or send the documents
>back to the working group to have major issues addressed.
>
>If the first outcome happens, the documents are put forward
>for a two-week last call to the entire IETF, and after
>successful completion the documents are published as RFCs
>with proposed standard status.
>
>If the second outcome happens, we go back and address
>the issues, putting the documents forward again when we
>believe they're ready.
>
>WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?
>
>You should read the documents, making sure that 1) there
>are no problems or deficiencies or outstanding issues that
>need to be resolved; and 2) that there are no typos,
>formatting problems, grammatical errors, etc.
>
>Any substantive problems you find, you should send to the
>list. Any minor problems (typos, etc.) you may send to the
>list or just to the authors. If, for some reason, you have
>comments you don't want to send to the entire list, you may
>send them to me and/or LDUP WG co-chair John Strassner.
>
>Silence means consent.
>
>Read, enjoy, and send your comments in!
>
>regards,
>Chris Apple and John Strassner
>
>Chris Apple
>Program Manager - Directory Services
>United Messaging Inc.
><http://www.unitedmessaging.com>
><mailto:[email protected]> 
>(V) 610-425-2860
>