[Edm] Few comments on draft-edm-protocol-greasing-02

[Cullen Jennings <[e-mail]>]

At a high level this document looks fine and I have no complaints with publishing it more or less as is. However, I do see one significant area that I think would improve it. I imagine this has been discussed before so take with large grain of salt. 

My experience with interoperability problems across a wide range of protocols is mishandling of code points is far less often the problem that breaks the future and a much more common issue is:

1) incorrect assumptions on ordering of options and/or,
2) incorrect assumptions that the bits will forever land in the same location in the packet. 

I view both designing and exercising the protocol to deal with these issues as a form of “greasing”. I wish the draft talked about that.

I think the draft could be a bit more concrete on exactly how to write IANA sections. 

On the trivial nits category, it seems like this draft could be much shorter and be very concrete about the recommendations. To put it bluntly, one of the LLM summary tools I used made content that I liked better. I’m not volunteering to do it but it might be worth of pass of “how much can be removed” from the draft. This is deeply an editorial comment and not something I care much about one way or the other.

No change needed for just as FWIW feedback, the draft failed to convince me that a large range of code points for greasing was going to offer much benefit over a very small number of code points.