[DNSOP] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-09: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 23 May 2017 20:05 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse@ietf.org, Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf@gmail.com>, dnsop-chairs@ietf.org, tjw.ietf@gmail.com, dnsop@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149556993903.28413.15691435664602759957.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 13:05:39 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/Hal6XIUw2WUZ7JTJRCeCLHCaVrc>
Subject: [DNSOP] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-09: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-09: Yes

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-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse/



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

This seems like a good change; the description is well written and easy
to understand; and the logic seems sounds and well-explained.

The abstract should remove the parentheses from the second paragraph, as
they form an important (as opposed to incidental) part of the description
of the update.

[DNSOP] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec… Adam Roach