[dhcwg] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-dhc-addr-notification-11: (with COMMENT)

[Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dhc-addr-notification-11: 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-dhc-addr-notification/



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

Thank you to Mallory Knodel for the GENART review.

** Section 4.2.1

   *  SHOULD log the address registration information (as is done
      normally for clients to which it has assigned an address), unless
      configured not to do so.  The server SHOULD log the client DUID
      and the link-layer address, if available.  The server MAY log any
      other information.

Section 1 elaborated on forensic and security use cases as key motivations for
this protocol feature.  If a log entry is not made for the registration as
allowed by this SHOULD, most of the value of this feature seems to be lost.

** Section 7. Editorial.

   *  one new DHCPv6 option, described in Section 4.1 which requires an
      allocation out of the registry of DHCPv6 Option Codes:

Technically, the registry name is “Option Codes”

** Section 7:  Editorial. Please state the obvious that the reference column is
this document for the two mentioned registries.