As the shepherding AD for this document, I am happy to see recent technical discussions on this document. OTOH, I do not observe any convergence to remove the pending DISCUSS.
The 2nd IETF Last Call was completed 2 months ago in April 2020. Joel Halpern did the review for routing directorate and found a couple of issues (zone-ID, loopback definition) and it seems that there is now an agreement within the community for updated the text. In order to progress the document, a revised I-D is needed to fix Ben’s DISCUSS points: - Use of rfc822Name rather than otherName: the ‘easy’ fix is indeed to use otherName (even with the section 6.1.2 justifications) - “MTI cryptographic mechanisms are under-specified” that should not be controversial and easy to fix - Clarification about the RPL root Unsure whether Eric Rescola’s DISCUSS are still applicable (as they were on -16); but, this would be a plus to fix these points. I understand that the authors have worked on this for 6 years and may be bored but I would love to see this I-D going forward. Again, as many others I fail to see the reason of using rfc822Name and the fix would be to use otherName. May I also suggest to the authors to add new co-authors in order to have ‘fresh blood’ and energy ? Regards -éric
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
