Martin Duke's Yes on draft-ietf-quic-manageability-16: (with COMMENT)

[Martin Duke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-quic-manageability-16: Yes

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/ 
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-quic-manageability/



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

2.1 Retry and VN packets “are not encrypted or protected in any way.” While
this is made clear later in the document, it would be good to way that Retry
packets are (forgibly) integrity-protected and that QUIC TPs later authenticate
most of the contents of these packets.

2.4 s/byes/bytes

3.1.1 it’s worth noting that compatible version negotiation can cause the
version to change mid-handshake. The true signal is a server-chosen version
field echoed in a client packet.

4.7 please update the QUIC-lb reference to draft-duke/ietf-quic-retry-offload.