Re: Evaluation: draft-allocchio-gstn - Text string notation for Dial Sequences and GSTN / E.164 addresses to Proposed Standard

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> writes:


> Last Call to expire on: August 6, 2002

> 	Please return the full line with your position.

>                     Yes    No-Objection  Discuss *  Abstain  
> Thomas Narten       [   ]     [   ]       [  x]      [   ] 

But a rather weak DISCUSS at that.

abstract does not pass ID nits

Also do we really need to use MUST in abstracts? I would think not.

   This memo describes the full text string representation method. This
   specification was explicitly created to provide an easy, unique and
   complete reference which MUST be used by all other specification 
   needing a text string representation for a Dial Sequence.

Doesn't seem appropriate to say everyone else MUST use this
spec. SHOULD would be sufficient.

I could also be pedantic, and question whether 2119 terminology is
even appropriate when making such general requirements on future
specifications. We get into somewhat iffy territory when we say future
specs MUST do X.