[Cbor] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-06: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Tue, 20 November 2018 20:18 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-cbor-cddl@ietf.org, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, cbor-chairs@ietf.org, barryleiba@computer.org, cbor@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154274508600.29845.1211433401636524348.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:18:06 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/Zh4iMshJ3W7udikaslU2sAYvbY0>
Subject: [Cbor] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-06: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-cbor-cddl-06: 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-cbor-cddl/



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

Most of my comments have already been captured by others, save one:

Is there a specific reason the normative appendices are not part of the main
body? I think a lot of RFC readers assume that appendices are optional to read.
We should not surprise them without reason.

[Cbor] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Ben Campbell
Re: [Cbor] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-i… Carsten Bormann
Re: [Cbor] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-i… Ben Campbell