Re: [Roll] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-12: (with COMMENT)

peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Tue, 28 July 2015 08:23 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B051A0218 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 01:23:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 m-nlZu1noQ-X for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 01:23:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net (lb2-smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net [194.109.24.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0805E1A020A for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 01:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.xs4all.nl ([194.109.20.217]) by smtp-cloud3.xs4all.net with ESMTP id xkPa1q0084h15BW01kPaLW; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 10:23:34 +0200
Received: from [2001:983:a264:1:3948:5a3f:df60:1149] by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Tue, 28 Jul 2015 10:23:34 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 10:23:34 +0200
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: robert.cragie@gridmerge.com, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <CADrU+dK44Gze4k5LKDK-_8HT2n-_=WMOMczk_XyPYOYGybyq2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20150725140840.20611.18415.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CADrU+dK44Gze4k5LKDK-_8HT2n-_=WMOMczk_XyPYOYGybyq2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1d2ab82d41646127afc4b7748166208b@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl (8nqqavAppstduFBK1qPrPFUwhoEeYugA)
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/93Zn8CacfWcemnzYN_djmPAoJpY>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 08:23:38 -0000

Hi Robert,

was this a response to my answer; or did our answers cross?
My intentions was to pass over the old comments quickly;

Peter

Robert Cragie schreef op 2015-07-28 10:18:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Please see inline for specific responses.
> 
> Regarding the old comments: We have tried to respond to these issues
> in previous follow up e-mails and modify the document in accordance
> with the responses. Repeating these old comments suggests that neither
> those responses nor the updated text have been read yet. Please can
> you read the responses and updated text before simply repeating these
> comments? Otherwise I can't see how we can make any progress on this.
> 
> Robert
> 
> On 25 July 2015 at 15:08, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>;
> wrote:
> 
>> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building-12: 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-roll-applicability-home-building/
>> 
>> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Thanks for the discussion about security. I didn't check
>> if the comments below were handled in -12, happy to
>> chat about that if you want.
>> 
>> First two comments are about text that's new in -11:
>> 
>> - 4.1.8: "MUST be present" is ambiguous - do you mean
>> it must be used? I think you do.
> 
> <RCC>This has been changed to "MUST be used on all nodes" in -12</RCC>
> 
>> - 4.1.8: "MUST be distributed or established in a
>> secure fashion" isn't really a protocol requirement.
>> Do you really just mean "see 4.1.8.1" ?
> 
> <RCC>As mentioned before, this is just introductory. I suggest
> removing the sentence to close the comment.</RCC>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll