[GROW] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior-06: (with COMMENT)

[Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-grow-wkc-behavior-06: 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-grow-wkc-behavior/



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

Requirements language:

Please use the RFC 8174 boilerplate.

Section 4.1:

s/is not really on IANA's list/is not individually named on IANA's list/

Section 5:

I'm not sure what the '>' character indicates.

Section 6:

"Vendors SHOULD clearly document the behavior of "set" directive in their
implementations." I'm not sure normative language makes sense here (otherwise,
what is the rationale for not using MUST?).