Martin, Thank you for the review and feedback.
-- JG James Gould Fellow Engineer [email protected] <applewebdata://13890C55-AAE8-4BF3-A6CE-B4BA42740803/[email protected]> 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com <http://verisigninc.com/> On 4/9/21, 8:17 PM, "Martin Duke via Datatracker" <[email protected]> wrote: Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer-06: 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://secure-web.cisco.com/1494LouXp6bnWPFFb6b5w8o2N6PBUWORrjKHj7DaJ1fIpki6yYVATnUosU_eR__hWijPM6aZrt4vX-R70aY_Ve_217eTqq4T3H1p3S5Jmr8L0THnw_Vx6y04g1mtiIN_2y01sFHCguCYGtz1gEUVkFYy73r5m6vh-lXVKBt7OCUB2Ptb7_Cf5ajuHaeu2_LbG6VMiYAyLuS2AaWhRknr2RYBYFb_b2wh-BeAmqodQNRX1Xfl_LAXAa8LlKnXEMIKT/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fiesg%2Fstatement%2Fdiscuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tY59lQ76IHNrNSCIANCtv_U3SJiFbCWPeNsk4IQ4UyZpg9VaGurEaU4pEsj5bPBvSOY8M4-8dwJR04JEHaz7xQxWqYnKBw8V-IYqayrShT4hPYDmk-Rs-o9w5cW0z_QABUGhNHzN7zCR8S9j0EdScfgTBC072IFBPGEPBFMjIZr-w_yfRbb_VYwghXmTt60IFtBBPMRul1biaf2rUeCcO3Uh65Boc76I86PYBa-IikrXpA8chtAHSjMPSlYsHcFG/https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-regext-secure-authinfo-transfer%2F ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- In the third paragraph of (5.3) there is a roundabout way of saying how the registry responds to a valid info request by saying that it MUST NOT send no authorization value, or a non-empty authorization value. It would be more straightforward to say something like "the registry MUST respond to a valid info request by the non-sponsoring registrar with an empty authorization value". JG - The third paragraph needs to be as explicit as possible to cover never including the authorization information value, but with the support of an optional existence indication of an authorization value only to the sponsoring registrar. Considering the combination of non-empty elements, empty elements, and two different types of clients (registrars), I believe the paragraph needs to stay as is. _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
