[core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-stateless-06: (with COMMENT)
Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 20 April 2020 11:51 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietf.org
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EEDB3A0BE9; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 04:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-core-stateless@ietf.org, core-chairs@ietf.org, core@ietf.org, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, cabo@tzi.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.127.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <158738349972.32616.5906857574368739549@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 04:51:40 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/HmlDBRVWexnhPadsxIC1TKAOVVI>
Subject: [core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-stateless-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 11:51:40 -0000
Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-core-stateless-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-core-stateless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for this document. I found the document easy to read and the concept described easy to understand. A few minor comments: 2.1 Extended Token Length (TKL) Field 13: An 8-bit unsigned integer precedes the Token field and indicates the length of the Token field minus 13. 14: A 16-bit unsigned integer in network byte order precedes the Token field and indicates the length of the Token field minus 269. I wonder whether it would be worth changing "precedes" to "directly precedes" to avoid any doubt of exactly where the length field appears? Although I note that the updated message formats are in the appendix anyway. 2.2.1. Extended-Token-Length Capability Option The draft doesn't suggest whether the Extended-Token-Length capability option should be used when the server only supports a max-length of 8. Would it be useful to give a recommendation for servers in this case, e.g. SHOULD they only include the capability if they support a max token length larger than 8 bytes? 3. Stateless Clients As servers are just expected to return any token verbatim to the client, this implementation strategy for clients does impact the interoperability of client and server implementations. However, there are a number of significant, non-obvious implications (e.g., related to security and other CoAP protocol features) that client implementations need take into consideration. I found the first sentence somewhat unclear - in that I was wondering if "does not impact" was intended instead of "does impact"? Or otherwise, I wasn't quite sure what this sentence was trying to convey.
- [core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf… Robert Wilton via Datatracker
- Re: [core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-… Klaus Hartke
- Re: [core] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-… Rob Wilton (rwilton)