Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-sidr-rpsl-sig-12: 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://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-sidr-rpsl-sig/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks all for chatting about my discuss, I think the outcome is good. --- OLD COMMENTS below, I didn't check 'em, feel free to chat more or not, as you think best. - If you keep the potential for http(s) URIs then I think more text is needed in the security considerations but it looks like you're taking that out for now so I guess that's ok. - 2.1, I don't see why it's useful to allow variation in the fields of the signature attribute e.g. why "MAY" the version not be 1st? - 2.1, "t=" and "x=" any limits on precision here? (Non-)support for fractional seconds can be a source for non-interop if not. The "All times MUST be converted to" is also actually a little ambiguous as you don't say to do that before signing;-) - 2.1, "a=" did you want a lowercase "must" there? - Are steps 2 and 3 in 3.1 order-sensitive? I think you might sometimes need to do 2 after 3, or re-do 2 maybe or else leading whitspace could be an issue. Maybe say that sometimes you need to do step 2 >1 time? - 3.1, oops, an ambiguity - in "The following steps MUST be applied in order..." does "in order" mean "in the order below" or "so as to"? I assume the latter. - 3.1: In general I think you'd be better if you pointed at specific bits of text in all the RFCs mentioned in 3.1 - it's maybe easy to get wrong otherwise, esp. if we don't yet have >1 implementation. - 3.1, step 6: names are all ASCII right? just checking - 3.2, step 1 - given 3.3 step 2, you're missing a step to "publish the cert" at the c= location as well. _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
