Re: [Anima] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Just to close the loop: All of Brian’s responses look fine to me.

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> On 14/12/2017 17:20, Ben Campbell wrote:
> ...> - On my first reading, I wondered why this was informational. It seems to seek
>> to standardize protocol elements. The explanation in the shepherd report
>> clarifies that; it would be helpful to include (a perhaps shortened version of)
>> that in the draft.
> 
> Awaiting instructions, but we can certainly do that if there's to be
> a new version of the draft.
> 
>> 
>> -2: RFC 8174 has boilerplate to address the "only in upper case" part. Please
>> consider using it rather than modifying the 2119 boilerplate.
> 
> Ack, the RFC Editor could do that too.
> 
>> 
>> -4.4: "It is therefore important to record all the prefix assignment history."
>> Isn’t this a local policy choice? Perhaps some operator believes in extreme log
>> minimization, does this mean to argue they are mistaken?
> 
> I'd say it is a requirement in order to detect or trace lost prefixes
> after outages, and probably a legal requirement in many countries
> (once jurisdictions realise that IPv6 prefixes are needed for tracing,
> not just addresses). But I agree that it isn't a requirement on the
> protocol defined in this draft, so it should be rephrased.
> 
> Thanks
>    Brian
> 
> 
>