Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-alto-unified-props-new-21: 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: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [S4.2, nit] * s/relatively to/relative to/, I think [S4.3, nit] * s/be be/be/ [S4.4.2, comment] * I think the last sentence of the paragraph might be trying to say "may or may not inherit the property P...", because the inheritance rules for the property lowercase-must be defined? Also: lowercase must? [S6.1.2.2, comment] * I gather there is no value to allowing link-local scope identifiers to appear here. The current text does not support such a thing, but perhaps consider whether or not to explicitly note that "%25", "%eth0" are invalid. Maybe it doesn't need an explicit mention, though. [S6.1.3, question] * Can this "undef" behavior be used to explicitly undefine an inherited property? For example, can "v4" be replaced with some "null" indicator in Figure 1 such that "ipv4:192.0.2.0/32" in Figure 2 becomes "(not defined)"? If there is no such mechanism, should there be? _______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
