Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-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-dnsop-rfc5933-bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-12

CC @evyncke

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). I share Roman's feeling about
the ISE stream rather than the IETF stream, especially since 'informative' is
enough.

Special thanks to Tim Wicinski for the shepherd's detailed write-up including
the WG consensus *but* missing the justification of the intended status (even
if the write-up alludes to informational is enough).

Thanks to Jim Reid and Scott Rose who did the DNS directorate reviews of this
document (even if the expectation of DNS directorate is to focus on documents
from non DNS WGs):

*
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-10-dnsdir-lc-reid-2022-10-16/
*
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-12-dnsdir-telechat-rose-2022-11-02/

Alas no public reaction by the authors...

I hope that this review helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

## COMMENTS

### Consensus boilerplate

It is missing ;-)

### Section 2.2

Suggest to add a RFC editor note with a request to update the text when the
official allocation is known (and redo the math of course). Last paragraph of
section 10 should be more detailed.

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues.

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments



_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop

Reply via email to