Subject: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-iana-special-ipv4-registry-01

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:16:12 -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-iana-special-ipv4-registry-01
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2009-06-30
IETF LC End Date: 2009-07-01
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:

This draft is almost ready for publication as an informational RFC. I  
have some minor comments that should be addressed first.

Major issues:

None.

Minor issues:

-- section 2, first paragraph:

Text refers to [rfc3330bis] but there is no corresponding entry in the  
references section.

-- section 3, 2nd paragraph:

Is [date] supposed to be a reference? If so, there is no corresponding  
item in the references section. If not, then I don't understand the  
intent of "...in [date]..."

-- section 3, third paragraph:

Should RFC5226 be a normative reference? It's not clear to me if the  
text means to say "this draft follows the policies..." or "further  
allocations MUST follow the policies". If the second, it would require  
a normative reference.

-- IANA considerations, 2nd to last paragraph:

How does this relate to the ability to state routing scopes in item 7?

Nits/editorial comments:

-- section 2, paragraph 1:

Should the "." be a ":"?

-- References

The entries [IANA] and [RFC2928] are not referred to in the body of  
the draft.