[6lo] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-18: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 05 February 2020 22:46 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietf.org
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6780120131; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 14:46:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd@ietf.org, Shwetha Bhandari <shwethab@cisco.com>, 6lo-chairs@ietf.org, shwethab@cisco.com, 6lo@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.116.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Message-ID: <158094281967.31164.15382174651975858202.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 14:46:59 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/CAKczQCIeXQDyEF3lx28AxvadsI>
Subject: [6lo] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-18: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 22:47:00 -0000

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-18: 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-6lo-ap-nd/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I support Ben Kaduk’s DISCUSS position.

Thank you for this well written document.

A few nits as the key issues already appear to be covered in other ballots:

** Section 4.1.  Typo. s/acertained/ascertained/

** Section 4.3.  Per “The type of cryptographic algorithm used in calculation
Crypto-ID (see Table 2 in     Section 8.3 ).”, why not reference the
sub-registry – “subregistry "Crypto-Type Subregistry" in the  Internet Control
Message Protocol version 6 (ICMPv6) Parameters"?

** Section 4.4.  In the description of the Digital Signature field, consider
adding that the length of this variable length field is determined by the
algorithm: OLD: The computation of the digital signature depends on
      the Crypto-Type which is found in the associated CIPO.

NEW:
The length and computation of the digital signature depends on
      the Crypto-Type which is found in the associated CIPO.

** Section 4.4. Typo. s/ths/this/