[babel] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis-12: Discuss

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-babel-rfc6126bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I support Roman's DISCUSS. I'm also unclear on the over-arching recommendation
this document is making for securely deploying this protocol. Given that the
protocol itself is insecure, I would have expected some normative requirement
for correcting that (e.g., Minimally, Babel deployments MUST be secured using a
lower-layer security mechanism, Babel over DTLS, or HMAC-based authentication.)
This still would not bring it into line with BCP 61 Section 7, but perhaps
there is some argument for making an exception for this protocol.


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

I support Suresh's DISCUSS.

An explanation of why this document obsoletes RFC 6126 and RFC 7557 needs to
appear in the introduction of this document.

Section 3.2.3: It's a bit odd that the Multicast Hello is introduced here but
the difference between the two kinds of hellos is not explained until Section
3.4.1. It makes me wonder if 3.2 should come after 3.4.

Section 3.6: s/is not left-distributive Section 3.5.2/is not left-distributive
(Section 3.5.2)/

Appendix C: This section should be in the body of the document.