Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-20: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for the work put into this document. Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if only for my own education), and some nits. Special thanks to Vijay Gurbani for the shepherd's extended write-up about the WG consensus (even if not using the usual template). While the document supports clearly the two address families (IPv4 and IPv6), I can only regret that the vast majority of examples are for IPv4. I hope that this helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric == COMMENTS == While the documents is very detailed, I would have preferred to have a generic introduction of the concepts at the beginning. It also seems to me that part of the text is repetitive. -- Section 3.1 -- I am a little puzzled by the use of "TCP/IP network flow" as it mixes up layers. Also, the "associated 5-tuple" is redundant because TCP has always 6 as protocol so it is not really a 5-tuple as one is constant. -- Section 4.6.1 -- The use of "ane" is done before its explanation later in section 4.6.2. -- Section 5.1.3 -- "net1.ipv6:2001:db8::1/48" is probably not an address block as it is a /128 address. -- Section 10.4 (and possibly others) -- Please use RFC 5398 when using ASN in examples. -- Section 10.9 -- Is the JSON reply valid ? -- Section 13 -- No hard feeling but I find it strange that the acknowledgements section also includes some affiliations. == NITS == -- Section 10.1 -- RFC 5792 prefers ipv6:::/0 to ipv6:::0/0 _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
