Re: [Id-event] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-11: (with COMMENT)

[Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mike!

Thanks for the clarifications below and the updated text now in -12.  It addresses all of my comments.

Regards,
Roman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Jones <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 1:44 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw <[e-mail]>; The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; id-
> [e-mail]; Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>
> Subject: RE: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-11:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Thanks for your review, Roman.  https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secevent-
> http-poll-12 is intended to address your comments.  Detailed replies are inline,
> prefixed by "Mike>".
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 8:09 AM
> To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; id-
> [e-mail]; Yaron Sheffer <[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-11:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-secevent-http-poll-11: 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-secevent-http-poll/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ** Section 2.2.  Per the ack array, is it fair to assume that an empty array is
> ignored?
> 
> Mike> It unambiguously is now. ;-)
> 
> ** Section 2.4.  Per “After a period of time configured between the SET
> Transmitter and Recipient, …”, is that configuration out of band/scope for this
> specification?
> 
> Mike> Yes, it's now explicitly described as being out of band.
> 
> ** Section 2.4.1.  Figure 1.  All of the other figures seem to explicitly state that
> this is a non-normative example.  s/The following is an example request/The
> following is a non-normative example of a request/.
> 
> Mike> I made this one consistent with the others.
> 
> ** Section 4.3.  This section is identical to Section 5.3 of draft-ietf-secevent-
> http-push.  Please review the recommended clarifications mentioned there --
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/id-event/9h4_z8S-
> JyMMCbrdW6V7b_YmGbI/
> 
> Mike> Also applied here.
> 
> 				Thanks again,
> 				-- Mike