Re: [Dots] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05: (with COMMENT)

[[e-mail]]

Hi Éric, 

Thanks for the comments. FWIW, you may track the changes to address your review at: https://github.com/boucadair/draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks/commit/8db30f1fbbba963a34dd37aa985d8ec6a9ad66dd  (or https://tinyurl.com/dots-robust-latest).

Please see inline for more context.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Envoyé : lundi 3 octobre 2022 17:21
> À : The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Cc : [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Objet : Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-robust-
> blocks-05: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-05: 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-dots-robust-blocks/
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> COMMENT:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> 
> 
> # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-dots-robust-blocks-
> 05
> CC @evyncke
> 
> Thank you for the work put into this document.
> 
> Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies
> would be
> appreciated even if only for my own education).
> 
> Special thanks to Valery Smyslov for the shepherd's detailed
> write-up including
> the WG consensus even if it lacks the justification of the
> intended status :-(
> 
> I hope that this review helps to improve the document,
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -éric
> 
> ## COMMENTS
> 
> ### Abstract
> 
> Should "in case of a DoS" be added to "should any of the blocks
> get lost in
> transmission" ?
> 

[Med] Added "(especially, during DDoS attacks)."

> ### Review by CORE WG ?
> 
> The shepherd's write-up mentions draft-ietf-core-new-block, but
> was this I-D
> formally reviewed by the CORE WG? It is usual to forward the WGLC
> to related
> WG; was it done ?
> 

[Med] I don't remember a formal message was sent to core WG, however, this spec is cited in RFC9177: 

      |  Note: For the particular DOTS application, PROBING_RATE and
      |  other transmission parameters are negotiated between peers.
      |  Even when not negotiated, the DOTS application uses customized
      |  defaults, as discussed in Section 4.5.2 of [RFC9132].  Note
      |  that MAX_PAYLOADS, NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, NON_TIMEOUT,
      |  NON_PROBING_WAIT, and NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT can be negotiated
      |  between DOTS peers, e.g., as per [DOTS-QUICK-BLOCKS].  When
      |  explicit values are configured for NON_PROBING_WAIT and
      |  NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT, these values are used without applying any
      |  jitter.


> ### Section 1
> 
> s/(i.e., responses may get dropped)/(e.g., responses may get
> dropped)/ ?
> 

[Med] Yes. Fixed. 

> ### Section 3, NON ?
> 
> The acronym "NON" is often used as a prefix, it would help the
> reader to
> provide the expansion of "NON" in the text.

[Med] Sure. Fixed. 

> 
> ### Security considerations
> 
> YANG modules often use
> https://trac.ietf.org/trac/ops/wiki/yang-security-guidelines to
> build the
> associated security considerations; is there any reason why this
> template was
> not used ?

[Med] This is because we are not using YANG for management purposes as per this note: 

   The "ietf-dots-robust-trans" module is not intended to be used via
   NETCONF/RESTCONF; it serves only to provide abstract data structures.
   This module uses the data structure extension defined in [RFC8791]. 

This is aligned with past RFCs that rely upon 8791. Thank you. 

> 
> ## Notes
> 
> This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You
> can use the
> [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review
> into
> individual GitHub issues.
> 
> [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
> [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
> 
> 


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.