Subject: [regext] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-epp-rdap-status-mapping-01: (with COMMENT)

From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 08:13:37 -0700

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-regext-epp-rdap-status-mapping-01: No Objection

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-regext-epp-rdap-status-mapping/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A few minor comments:

- I guess this doc should cite RFC5730 and RFC7482 (?) in the intro...?

- I would propose to directly put the link to the registation in the
introduction instead of using a citation ([rdap-json-values]) because I
initially didn't realize that this not a doc.

- And effectively you could even remove section 2 mostly or potentially
even competely as all information are given (word-for-word) in the IANA
consideration section.

And thanks for the nice in in-depth shepherd write-up!