[DNSOP] Orie Steele's No Objection on draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09: (with COMMENT)

[Orie Steele via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Orie Steele has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09: 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-dnsop-rfc8624-bis/



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

# Orie Steele, ART AD, comments for draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09
CC @OR13

* line numbers:
  -
  https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc8624-bis-09.txt&submitcheck=True

* comment syntax:
  - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md

* "Handling Ballot Positions":
  - https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/

## Comments

Thanks to Barry Leiba for the ARTART review.

### Guidance to DEs for divergence?

```
268        and "use".  We note that the values for "Implement for" and "Use for"
269        may diverge in the future
```

The divergence that is expected here is probably that there will be more
implementation than use, right?

Some additional guidance to DEs might be helpful here.

## Nits

### KSK expand on first use.

```
391        Upgrading algorithm at the same time as rolling the new KSK key will
```