Subject: Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto-07

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:04:01 -0500

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto-07
Reviewer: Ben Campbell	
Review Date:  2008-03-28
IETF LC End Date:  2008-03-31
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

NOTE: This is a review of version 07 of this draft. The gen-ART  
assignment was for version 06, but the draft was revised prior to my  
actual review.

Summary: This draft is almost (really close) ready for publication as  
a draft standard. I have a small number of comments that should be  
considered prior to publication.

Comments:

Section 2.7, third to last bullet on Page 6:

"URI headers with hname
       "received" are considered unsafe, and will be ignored."

Was that intended to be MUST be ignored? I noticed that similar  
statements are made about other header fields that do say MUST. It is  
not clear to me if this particular sentence was meant as normative  
language for the notifier, or descriptive language of what the  
recipient of the notification would do.

References:

IDNITS reports that draft-ietf-sieve-variables has been published as  
RFC 5229. Also, the [Notify] reference describes a very outdated  
version of that draft--I suggest checking all of the references to  
make sure they are current.

Editorial nits (opinions only--none of these need to block publication)

Section 1.1:

I found the first sentence a little hard to digest. I think it would  
read better if expanded into 2 or 3 sentences.

I also found the style of references disruptive to the flow of  
reading. The paragraph uses a rather clever overloading of references  
to serve as nouns in sentences. Although one can get away with this  
when the noun in question is the document being referenced, as in  
"...notations are as in [Sieve] section 1.1 ...", I find it visually  
disruptive to read "The [Notify] extension to the [Sieve] mail  
filtering language...". My brain keeps stopping to wonder what is with  
all the square brackets--it is not immediately clear from context that  
the brackets are there to denote references.

Thanks!

Ben.

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf