[Pce] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions-10: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 15 May 2019 19:42 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions@ietf.org, Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, pce-chairs@ietf.org, dhruv.ietf@gmail.com, pce@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Message-ID: <155794937014.30721.8514006577664746897.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 12:42:50 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/mXd4Etw62UhbGYnZrGiPTw-rZlM>
Subject: [Pce] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions-10: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-hierarchy-extensions-10: 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-pce-hierarchy-extensions/



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

A few simple items in the Security Considerations (Section 8):
(1) s/security requirements defined in [RFC5440]/security considerations
defined in [RFC5440]/.  The motivation for this change is that the discussion
of vulnerabilities and mitigations in [RFC5440] also applies.

(2) Please include a reference to RFC7525 when recommending TLS/RFC8253

[Pce] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Roman Danyliw via Datatracker