> 1. I believe it may be more correct to refer to RFC 4012 rather than > 2622 (as inet6num support is declared in this draft)
thanks! > 2. paragraph 4, first block, I think it should say "there IS a fair > number of them." <blush> > 3. paragraph 5 "The geofeed files SHOULD be published over and fetched > using https". maybe the word https should be capitalized HTTPS? can you cite where i would get good answers to such stuff? the rfced usually cleans them up. > 4. paragraph 6 "If an inetnum: for a wide prefix (e.g. a / 16) points > to an RPKI-signed geofeed file, a customer or attacker could publish a > unsigned". maybe s/a unsigned/an unsigned/ ? <blush> yet again > 5. oh, speaking of Iff, I would prefer if and only if, extended. will you not hate me if i leave it and let rfc have one more reason to whack me? randy _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
