The IESG approval of this I-D caused me to look again at it:-(
I note that part of the formal specification is in CDDL and while other DDL - ASN.1, SMI, YANG - are bracketed with CODE BEGINS CODE ENDS - the CDDL is not. I suspect that it should be - perhaps a note to the RFC Editor is called for.
In the Security Considerations I encounter MTIM which I suspect should be MITM (and which needs expanding on first use in s.5).
In the YANG module, I see two references in square brackets which suggests that they are in XML/HTML and not plain text whereas there is a requirement for YANG modules to be in plain text so that they can be extracted from the RFC.
Tom Petch On 03/01/2020 18:34, Michael Richardson wrote:
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
