Re: [gnso-pednr-dt] For Final Review - PEDNR Final Report

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

A few comments/suggestions. I don't think that any of them are controversial.

I have not yet done a full read-through but focused on the Recs as 
shown in the Exec Summary and the preamble to the Recs in Section 8.

Line 148: Replace "each of the" with "the five". The way it is now, 
it sounds like we have 18 Recs for each charter question.
Line 155: The pointer for the charter questions can be back to 
section 1.1 of the Exec Summary.
Footnote after line 212: It looks like there is an extra blank after 
"information".
Footnote after line 212: My recollection is that we talked about 
intercepting port 443 (secure - https) and it was pointed out that 
generally a registrar could not do this due to certificates not 
matching. However, I don't think that there is any harm in leaving 
the possibility as in this footnote. I am not sure what the meaning 
of "only one IP" is.
Michele, as our resident technical expert, are you happy with the wording here?

Line 207: For clarity, I would replace "Wording" with "Wording in the policy".

Line 344/5: Replace "is requested to provide updates" with "be 
requested to provide updates to the GNSO Council"
Comment analysis after line 1212, box after comment 9, two 
occurrences of RNHAE instead of RHNaE.
I had suggested that we add a statement on implementation timelines. 
Unless it is there somewhere and I didn't notice it, I suggest that 
we add a new paragraph after line 1236:
The WG recognizes that the implementation timeline for some of the 
recommendations may be different from others. The recommendations 
should be implemented as quickly as practicable without introducing 
delays simply to keep the implementations synchronized.
Alan