Document: draft-ietf-ltru-registry-13.txt  
Reviewer: Elwyn Davies [elwynd@dial.pipex.com]
Review Date:  Monday 10/10/2005 6:49 AM CST
Telechat Date:  Thursday 10/13/2005

Summary: This document is generally in good shape and well written 
but is almost ready for publication, subject to one issue and an 
editorial nit:


S3.1, para 1, last sentence: Unfortunately there has been an 
interaction between two sets of last call comments which has lead 
to a problem.

When I reviewed this document for last call the corresponding 
registry initialisation document  (draft-ietf-ltru-initial-04.txt) 
was going to contain an archival list of all the subtags that 
were going to be registered initially.  I therefore made the point
that generating registration forms for them was rather redundant.  
The authors and wg accepted this and s3.1 was changed accordingly.

In the meantime, another last call reviewer suggested that 
maintaining the list  in the initialisation document was dangerous 
as it might be used instead of the registry itself. 
This comment was also accepted and so draft-ietf-ltru-initial-05.txt 
has instructions to remove the actual list before publication.

This means that we have gone from the position where there would 
have been two records of the initial registrations to one where 
there will now be zero records.  This is almost certainly not desirable.

So I guess we should go back to the original wording from v11 of this 
draft which requires the creation of registration forms for the 
extra  (non-3066) items registered when the new registry is created.

Editorial nit:
The new title of Figure 2 should be 'Registry Record Format' and 
not 'record-jar format' (which it isn't in any case).