[Ntp] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 21 August 2020 14:32 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9143A08CD; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 07:32:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke_via_Datatracker?= <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds@ietf.org, ntp-chairs@ietf.org, ntp@ietf.org, Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org>, odonoghue@isoc.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.14.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke?= <evyncke@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <159802037308.10371.11780852739141456472@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 07:32:53 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/BfAMsGSB8IwQr5RHheFHo04dXoM>
Subject: [Ntp] =?utf-8?q?=C3=89ric_Vyncke=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-ietf-?= =?utf-8?q?ntp-mode-6-cmds-09=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 14:32:53 -0000

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ntp-mode-6-cmds-09: 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-ntp-mode-6-cmds/



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

Thank you for the work put into this document.

First, I must admit that this is the first time I see an IETF stream
informational document for the specification of a control protocol used by an
obsoleted RFC 1305. This document is much easier to read than the appendix B of
RFC 1305 and the author takes care to write that this spec is not mandatory to
implement but I really wonder why this document exists ?

Moreover the abstract says "The goal of this document is to provide a current,
but historic, " so why not publishing this document as 'historic' rather than
'informal' (datatracker seems to allow this modification).

Please find below a couple of non-blocking COMMENTs (and I would appreciate a
reply to each of my COMMENTs) and some NITs.

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

== COMMENTS ==

-- Section 1.1 --
Suggest to replace 'IP' by 'IPv4' in 'IP hosts are not required to reassemble
datagrams larger than 576' + add some text that this document applies the same
limitation to IPv6.

-- Section 2 --
Possibly linked to my lack of understanding of the purpose of this document,
but, if applicable only to NTPv3, then should the Version number clearly
specified to be 3 ?

-- Section 3.2 --
Suggest to add 'bit' after 'Peer Status' in the table headings to make it clear.

-- Section 4 --
It will probably be useful to expand 'MRU' at first use.

In the "Read ordered list (11):" it is not clear how the entries are ordered in
the case of "ifstats" is it per local address ? Are IPv4 addresses before IPv6
addresses ?

-- Appendix A --
Is there a reason why the mode 7 is in the appendix and not in the main body ?

== NITS ==

-- Section 2 --
s/Conains/Contains/

-- Section 4 --
Should there be a comma in 'seven characters "ifstats" the associated' before
'the associated' ?