[CDNi] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types-08: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 04 January 2023 21:23 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types@ietf.org, cdni-chairs@ietf.org, cdni@ietf.org, kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com, kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
Message-ID: <167286738148.22977.6255269461738324173@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2023 13:23:01 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cdni/ewXg7MqRvvgUgz21K0DqbdLXZqw>
Subject: [CDNi] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types-08: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types-08: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types/



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

# Sec AD review of draft-ietf-cdni-additional-footprint-types-07

CC @paulwouters

Please refer to
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

This review uses the format specified in https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/
which allows automated tools to process items (eg to produce github issues)

## COMMENTS

### Section 2.2

In section 2.2, I would add a subscript line to the non-working figure to
clarify to anyone skimming the document that this is not actually a supported
configuration, eg:

```
{
  "capabilities": [
    {
      "capability-type": <CDNI capability object type>,
      "capability-value": <CDNI capability object>,
      "footprints": [
          {
              "footprint-type": "ipv4cidr",
              "footprint-value": ["192.0.2.0/24"]
          },
          {
              "footprint-type": "ipv6cidr",
              "footprint-value": ["2001:db8::/32"]
          }
      ]
    }
  ]
}

Figure 2: Example of a non-working footprint object
```

Perhaps also number the other figures in the document with descriptive texts?

### Security Considerations
```
Therefore, to meet confidentiality requirements, the use of transport-layer
security mechanisms as specified in Section 7 of [RFC8008] is expected. ```

Instead of "is expected", why not "is RECOMMENDED" ? or "transport-layer
security mechanisms as specified in Section 7 of [RFC8008] SHOULD be used."

### NITS:
```
    Section 7.2 of [RFC8006] creates the [...]
```

This is already created, so either use "created" or use "specifies".

[CDNi] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-c… Paul Wouters via Datatracker
Re: [CDNi] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ie… Nir Sopher