[Idr] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-11: (with COMMENT)

[Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param-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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-ext-opt-param/



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

Thanks for this short and sweet document; I have very little to say.

Section 2

And we're sure that a two-byte length is going to be enough "for ever",
right?

Section 3

   MUST NOT be used other than as described above.  If encountered as an
   actual Optional Parameter Type code, it MUST be treated as an

Is "actual Option Parameter Type code" synonymous with "in any position
other than the first option parameter type"?  In some sense "actual
Option Parameter" seems slightly under-specified.