I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at . Document: draft-gellens-lost-validation-05 Reviewer: Pete Resnick Review Date: 2020-03-07 IETF LC End Date: 2020-03-31 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Abstract, Scope, and Introduction do not accurately reflect the content of the document, which is not simply a registration. Major issues: The Abstract and sections 1 & 2 (Scope and Introduction) indicate that this document is simply an IANA registration of an S-NAPTR Application Service Tag. However, section 3 is quite clearly new protocol, some of which changes how RFC 5222 implementations should operate if used in a particular context, and section 4 lays out the backward compatibility of this new protocol with legacy RFC 5222 implementations. There is the implication that the NENA i3 documents will actually be the home of that protocol, but the current i3 document referenced here does not do so, making this document the canonical statement of the protocol operations necessary to implement the i3 architecture. That doesn't seem appropriate for an Informational document that purports to simply be a registration. At the very least, the Abstract, Scope, and Intro would need to be updated to reflect the actual contents of the document. I think things would be better served by making this a Proposed Standard document so that it gets the appropriate level of review. I understand from the Shepherd writeup that the ECRIT WG doesn't have the energy to really work on this document. However, this is a simple enough extension to the LoST protocol that I think it's unproblematic to have it as an AD-sponsored standards track document.