Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-anima-brski-ae-12: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-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-anima-brski-ae/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you to Meral Shirazipour for the GENART review. ** Section 4.2.1 As a more general solution, the BRSKI discovery mechanism can be extended to provide up-front information on the capabilities of registrars. Future work such as [I-D.eckert-anima-brski-discovery] may provide this. Does it make sense to reference and promise work on an individual, expired I-D? ** Section 7 notes that the Security Considerations of RFC8995 apply. What of the privacy consideration of RFC8895 (Section 10)? Do they apply or need any refinement (e.g., Section 10.2)? _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
