[alto] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-20: (with COMMENT)

[Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-alto-incr-update-sse-20: 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-alto-incr-update-sse/



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

Just some very minor things here:

Please use the new BCP 14 boilerplate and add a normative reference to RFC 8174.

— Section 2 —
It’s a small thing, but in the first paragraph is it really useful to list the
terms, only to have each one defined right below?  My eye can instead run down
the paragraphs and catch the list of terms that way.

— Section 8 —
Just a note that I did not carefully review the examples.

— Section 12 —
Please add “Fragment identifier considerations” to the templates, as required
by RFC 6838.  It would also not be a bad idea to separate the two templates
with whitespace or a text paragraph, for readability.