[I2nsf] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-25: (with COMMENT)

[Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm-25: 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-i2nsf-registration-interface-dm/



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

The shepherd writeup seems to have skipped answering part of the first
question: Why is this the right document status?

I'm also confused by the answer to question 18.

[copied from my otherwise-resolved DISCUSS]

It also makes me wonder if this shouldn't be updating some other document if
you're extending required behavior of an I2NSF component that was defined
someplace else.  I looked around for a document defining "security controller"
and couldn't find an obvious one, so I'm at a loss for what to suggest.