Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-09: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Please add a sentence to the Introduction explaining how this document updates rfc7950. I know that a couple of sections explicitly indicate what part of rfc7950 they update, but having a short summary at the beginning would be nice. (2) Section 3 says: “It is expected that the revised definitions provided in this section will replace the definitions in [RFC6241] and [RFC7950] when these documents are revised.” Why not formally Update those documents here? [See my note above about the Update to rfc7950.] (3) s/Section 4.4 of this document/Section 4.4 of rfc6244 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
