Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-precis-7700bis-08: Yes
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-precis-7700bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I like the clear explanation of some of the design choices in here (e.g., the rationale for using NFKC). There are two places that I think a slight bit of additional text might be useful: 1. When talking about processing "each string" in section 2.4, it's probably worth noting that implementations should be careful not to assume that any information received from a wire protocol has necessarily had any of the rules in this document applied to it (as this might allow intentionally noncompliant clients to slip certain kinds of shenanigans past their checks); and 2. Where the final paragraph of section 4 indicates that the operations in this document are not necessarily idempotent, it is probably worth being more explicit that they should be applied repeatedly until the output string is stable; or, if the string does not stabilize after a reasonable number of iterations (is this possible?), that it should be rejected as invalid. _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
