[Netconf] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-25: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-netconf-zerotouch-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/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-netconf-zerotouch/



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

I support Adam's and Alexey's DISCUSS points.

§1.2: I have a bit of discomfort in how the manufacturer/owner business model
is encoded into this. In particular, is there any possibility of anonymous
owners? How about secondary markets (i.e. transfer of a device between owners)
without mediation by the manufacturer.)? But I see this is actually mentioned
in the security considerations, so I don't really expect a change.

§3.1, 4th paragraph: The first sentence is convoluted; please consider breaking
it into multiple simpler sentences.

- 6th paragraph: The first sentence is even more convoluted.

§5.6, 10th paragraph: I'm not sure how to interpret "MUST try". That doesn't
seem verifiable. -- first bullet under "implementation notes": is "roll out of"
the same things as "roll back"?

§9.8:
- 4th paragraph: Can the "best practices" be cited or described? Otherwise, the
normative "RECOMMENDED" seems pretty vague. (Or are the next few sentences
intended to define those practices?

-5th paragraph: Paragraph is hard to parse.