Re: [Ohai] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config-06: (with COMMENT)

[Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for the review, Eric!

I’ve opened this PR to address your comments:

https://github.com/ietf-wg-ohai/draft-ohai-svcb-config/pull/59

Particularly, to address your comment about the well-known URI, I have rephrased the text to clarify:

 This document defines a well-known resource ({{WELLKNOWN}}),
 "/.well-known/ohttp-gateway", which is an Oblivious Gateway Resource
 available on the same host as the target resource.

Best,
Tommy

> On Oct 2, 2023, at 2:21 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Dear authors, 
> 
> I would like to apologize for the presence of the DISCUSS section in my ballot. Monday morning, not enough coffee, ... and I left the 'DISCUSS' parts from my ballot template.
> 
> So, please ignore the DISCUSS related sentences as they should not be there.
> 
> -éric
> 
> On 02/10/2023, 10:59, "iesg on behalf of Éric Vyncke via Datatracker" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> on behalf of [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> 
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config-06: 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/ <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-ohai-svcb-config/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config-06
> 
> 
> Thank you for the work put into this document.
> 
> 
> Please find below one blocking DISCUSS points (easy to address), some
> non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if only for
> my own education), and some nits.
> 
> 
> Special thanks to Shivan Kaul Sahib for the shepherd's detailed write-up
> including the WG consensus ***and*** the justification of the intended status.
> 
> 
> Please note that Ralf Weber is the DNS directorate reviewer and you may want to
> consider this dns-dir review as well when it will be available (no need to wait
> for it though):
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config/reviewrequest/18156/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ohai-svcb-config/reviewrequest/18156/>
> (and I have read Tommy's reply to Ralf's Last Call review)
> 
> 
> I hope that this review helps to improve the document,
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> -éric
> 
> 
> # DISCUSS
> 
> 
> As noted in https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/ <https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/>, a
> DISCUSS ballot is a request to have a discussion on the following topics:
> 
> 
> ##
> 
> 
> # COMMENTS
> 
> 
> ## Section 1
> 
> 
> Should DNR also be mentioned (if applicable) ? Esp as this I-D contains section
> 4.2.2.
> 
> 
> ## Section 3
> 
> 
> I would expect a direct object in ` it "upgrades"`, i.e., what is upgraded ?
> 
> 
> ## Section 4.2.2
> 
> 
> Suggest to also add examples as in the DDR/HTTP sections above.
> 
> 
> ## Section 5
> 
> 
> I hesitated to raise a DISCUSS level on this one... Should normative language
> be used in `By default, the gateway for a target is defined as a well-known
> resource ([WELLKNOWN]) on the target, "/.well-known/ohttp-gateway".` ? I.e.,
> 'by default' is rather vague.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>