[Dots] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 21 February 2019 03:42 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB8B128CB7; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:42:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dots-requirements@ietf.org, Liang Xia <frank.xialiang@huawei.com>, dots-chairs@ietf.org, frank.xialiang@huawei.com, dots@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.91.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <155072052056.20358.15761578065156106209.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 19:42:00 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/-gTDammFKZsTZdejP4iVuaKKS3I>
Subject: [Dots] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 03:42:00 -0000

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dots-requirements-18: 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-dots-requirements/



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

- I'm curious what the archival value this has for publishing as an RFC. Did
the WG consider alternative publication methods? (e.g., leave as a draft,
publish in a WG wiki)

§1.2: The draft uses 2119/8174 keywords to describe requirements for protocol
design. That's not really how 2119 defines them. That doesn't prevent using
them here, but it would be helpful to modify or add to the boilerplate to
indicate this.