Hi Francesca,
A new version that echoes the replies already provided in this thread is
available:
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-18.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/
Htmlized:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-18
Diff:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-18.txt
Some more context is provided inline for some changes made in this version
to better address your comments.
Please let me know if you still have any comments. Thanks.
Cheers,
Jensen
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 6:34 AM Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <
nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
> Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto-17: Discuss
>
> 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
> for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cdni-request-routing-alto/
>
>
>
> --
> DISCUSS:
> --
>
> Thank you for the work on this document.
>
> Many thanks to Thomas Fossati for his in-depth review:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/MKG2Cdin96WLcksnA6nAu6pvThM/ ,
> and
> thanks to the authors for addressing it.
>
> I have two comments that need to be addressed before publication.
>
> As noted in https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/, a
> DISCUSS ballot is a request to have a discussion; I really think that the
> document would be improved with a change here, but can be convinced
> otherwise.
>
> Francesca
>
> 1. -
>
> data: },
> data: { "op": "add",
> data: "/cdni-advertisement/capabilities-with-footprints
> /0/footprints/0/footprint-value/-",
> data: "value": "192.0.2.0/24"
> data: }
> data: ]
>
> FP: JSON doesn't validate. The key "path": is missing.
>
Thanks. This issue has been fixed.
>
> 2. -
>
> Media type registration
>
> FP: I haven't seen the media type registrations being reviewed by the
> media-type mailing list, as requested by RFC 6838. Before progressing the
> document, I would really appreciate the authors to post the registrations
> to
> the media-type mailing list for review. Note that people there might also
> weigh
> in to the point Thomas made about the media type name, and if it's worth
> specifying a more detailed media type name, or not in this case.
>
>
We have sent registration request email to media-type mailing list:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/alto/m2HjCMBCmJtFkRVsOTgN_qNkhas/
Please let us know if there is anything else we need to follow. Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> alto mailing list
> alto@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>
___
alto mailing list
alto@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
