This email contains my AD Review (identical to issue #87 in github).
I think all the but the last comment should be easy to address, and I
welcome some discussion on the last topic. Once a new revised I-D is
published, I will be most happy to initiate an IETF-LC.
Best wishes,
Gorry
(responsible AD)
====
Thank you for submitting this I-D for publication. This is my AD Review,
after a revised I-D is submitted, I plan to pass this to IETF-LC.
* I have a few editorial suggestions, see a separate PR.
* The clause 'SHOULD remain vigilant' is understood, but could say
more about how and specifically the action to be taken is not
specified. Could a sentence be added to explain what ought to happen
in this case?
* There is a section marked; "Acknowledgments" with the contents:
"TODO acknowledge'. Please finish this text or remove this section.
The document could include a short "Operational Considerations" Section,
e.g., to explain in a sentence how an implementation handles the
reception of a reset_stream_at (0x1d) transport parameter, when this is
not supported, perhaps by simply referring to standard QUIC processing.
Finally, the document targets PS status, but there is no stated
implementation experience, which is often expected - a short list of
implementation work and/or interop testing would be useful to justify
publication as a PS. This section can be removed after IESG review by
the RFC-Ed.
1.July.2026
===
