[apps-discuss] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis-09: (with COMMENT)

["Ben Campbell" <[e-mail]>]

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis-09: 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-appsawg-rfc7001bis/



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

Edit: All of my comments have been addressed via email. The resolution is
that I was in the rough on all points; no change needed.


-- 2.6, 2nd paragraph:

Why might one choose _not_ to include version tokens?

-- 2.7.7, first paragraph, last sentence:

I’m not sure how such a “preference” should be applied for IANA stuff

-- 4, last sentence:

Known not to authenticate, or not known to authenticate?

-- 4.1, 2nd paragraph

is it reasonable for users to be expected to know which services are used
in their ADMDs?

-- 5, last paragraph:

How do you imply a version?