Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-18: (with COMMENT)

Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it> Sun, 04 October 2020 07:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C2E3A1269; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 00:29:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.112
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.112 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ymwoKXZPSFyS; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 00:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it (mx4.iit.cnr.it [146.48.98.151]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B7653A126A; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 00:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FD3B8020F; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 09:29:40 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mx4.iit.cnr.it
Received: from smtp.iit.cnr.it ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.iit.cnr.it [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PJ93w0H6HWPA; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 09:29:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.12.193.108] (pc-loffredo.nic.it [192.12.193.108]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.iit.cnr.it (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6835B800F7; Sun, 4 Oct 2020 09:29:37 +0200 (CEST)
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging@ietf.org, regext-chairs@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org, Tom Harrison <tomh@apnic.net>
References: <160167705012.17500.11549061115758883164@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Mario Loffredo <mario.loffredo@iit.cnr.it>
Message-ID: <d9a1e172-851e-d0a6-6a6b-a4df135d13cc@iit.cnr.it>
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2020 09:26:14 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <160167705012.17500.11549061115758883164@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: it
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/ZDOSlP_wb5Pd5OEHNsHPQpZSftQ>
Subject: Re: [regext] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-18: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2020 07:29:45 -0000

Done in version -19.

Best,

Mario

Il 03/10/2020 00:17, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker ha scritto:
> Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging-18: 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-regext-rdap-sorting-and-paging/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thanks for the updates in the -18; they look good with one exception:
>
> In Section 2.4, I strongly recommend using the word "encode" (and "encoding")
> instead of "encrypt" (and "encryption") -- it is good to reserve the term "encrypt"
> for a procedure that applies cryptographic protection.  Part of why we are
> anti-recommending base64 for this usage is because it does not provide cryptographic
> protection, so it is surprising to use the word "encrypt" to describe it.
>
>
>
-- 
Dr. Mario Loffredo
Systems and Technological Development Unit
Institute of Informatics and Telematics (IIT)
National Research Council (CNR)
via G. Moruzzi 1, I-56124 PISA, Italy
Phone: +39.0503153497
Mobile: +39.3462122240
Web: http://www.iit.cnr.it/mario.loffredo