Subject: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-servicelistboundary-02

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:35:47 +0200

Hi Karl Heinz, 

Preparing the PROTO writeup I noticed the following issues with the
document: 

* References: I believe RFC 5582 should be moved to the informative
references since it is not required for the implementation of this
specification and it would lead to a DOWNREF. 

* Relax NG Schema: Given that you have a fairly complex Relax NG schema
in the document I was wondering whether you have solicited feedback from
the XML directorate? 

I also had a question regarding the include statement and whether it
wouldn't be possible to reference the LoST schema here by URL rather
than by filename. 

* Editorial bugs. There are bunch of editorial issues in the document
and I was wondering whether you have asked a native speaker to have a
quick look at it (so that the RFC editor does not have all the work in
the end). 

* ID nits: I ran the document through the IDNITs tool and it reported a
few issues: 
http://tools.ietf.org/idnits?url=http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-ecr
it-lost-servicelistboundary-02.txt

(including old license statement, no intended status of the document,
...)

* Document title: it seems that the document title does not fit nicely
into the IETF ECRIT WG charter page. I would suggest to change it to
"LoST Service List Boundary Extension". 

Ciao
Hannes