Re: [Roll] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)

Charles Perkins <charliep@lupinlodge.com> Wed, 18 August 2021 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <charliep@lupinlodge.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF443A1D2D; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:49:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lupinlodge.com
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 i0t1moRHTMTE; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [146.66.121.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBBF63A1D29; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 246.206.208.35.bc.googleusercontent.com ([35.208.206.246] helo=giowm1055.siteground.biz) by se24.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <charliep@lupinlodge.com>) id 1mGSUP-000CNA-6x; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 15:48:52 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lupinlodge.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=o/iEllalrSLfnO3iHzW98XFOQtXoNujHUUvpFM/g9Ec=; b=uNeTOsLKOlrXK0xa3FlxIZHG7G F3gVxrmCemBiwApwB8eOl5ZiJBE0BfmeB7ieVfFOua1VYGyqjv5vsLHb/nw1wTe7o5MqkyyjgSD9K 4XTf/EWAezaDUpvfTfT2FlivXDRk09JGduLp2JUo2vKJF4dgL5zG/l9bkbySjiNVMpAs=;
Received: from [99.51.72.196] (port=49751 helo=[192.168.1.72]) by giowm1055.siteground.biz with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.90-.1) (envelope-from <charliep@lupinlodge.com>) id 1mGSUO-0007qE-2t; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:48:44 +0000
To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl@ietf.org, roll-chairs@ietf.org, roll@ietf.org, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
References: <161907746666.4867.10229249239001365546@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Charles Perkins <charliep@lupinlodge.com>
Message-ID: <eb650d3e-6710-e344-f265-3881a3e49618@lupinlodge.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:48:42 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <161907746666.4867.10229249239001365546@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: 35.208.206.246
X-SpamExperts-Domain: giowm1055.siteground.biz
X-SpamExperts-Username: 35.208.206.246
Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=35.208.206.246@giowm1055.siteground.biz
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.08)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Pt3MvcO5N4iKaDQ5O6lkdGlMVN6RH8bjRMzItlySaT+v0w8gZxDMhITR9xDvibgIPUtbdvnXkggZ 3YnVId/Y5jcf0yeVQAvfjHznO7+bT5xfhCjHc1rE8j8s8Zbm/wGXznzsYfkdUR16HjGz62pljkko TB1XoRIdpR5ZFOj8MnTOPzAiZwO0erKqGmrB0kNW7yD795EJLHugJKDmd9LZyfBlQ+yfeyWAPtDm XI1PtJNHkh02GMZpkpvzzOke7JxoQPrPgIKCOcN1qssFDA9lsDKCUy+RuevJVoQ1jGOH3u89lTcF 0nAicfQwnBE0p73+gi8CjSEWC7j0q8S0agjsJeqO/uBhcW+rSceRJmf0M28nJJi115yA99rHmPhC gjHZoCCtFYmcCNjTw0IEYuSBISdIc1z987KxjnN2qrUKswhgmjnnY6XN7GZkAc90rB/vT6DFxcIx sfY8ymUCNeJ1PV4GLBqE4vFQbCw4uvHas5X6cdujFziTKhHhtuJji2qTZzIlieWO+yOK/hQOlnb7 /gjSjTQtLKET7a1o26jWEA4pT1oQPsaRmjMQQbG4oCtlqraCXgGgCDOczZcC0s+1rB1w4ezeryh8 miQvz6mokWAXKu1VbgppFJRGoXLED7mHbHZsKnPGAG9EmVl99HfXliJerQ/b2vNFvf9+6MY9I7Rm M83oYG1f2hvsbrozvcruUQGikfn1L9uFSajQqTH5BQJf8mVhU8r5rmMqlFbhWQZFh/T02nV1yf6H ImOjkafEVw9h4qB6AAdqJB1vRIoHvM06XMlzwys1Tht21N2PH6FWQNES0ePkR0h9FZBTWJBw31/E 3ahF5MMcDI7KdpjQKS1ufdwfVck/BrlQBpgZOulli19mW0G91CSooRJqA7sIJjRkswWb241mydgU Xdp1uiDrOjhXmyQVnBqirCXNcY7ek8Zfcsf9wYajt5ucndrY++DuIQUs/5JJj4C/n4CILm2PvW0J BPNlv566oByhiElxesPT8ptdGXrNba/E678EQtiCI+DID2BGlZ0tjUQemvCcuqTfiXRspgDFoNJF g4PUYApavlxVu9Nt2j2RoT3QNW+cVyLKs/RxOX1K4cPDaosEMysPur9wmiDBurOy6iR0CTbPdkJV rvqgqaoaGrJ9JlXoybOvrfLlgErbJFPCXxFQ44ODunxoXZO7OzlEJNbmm9PE4oe3oHezoGaGVr4E YKKwuBUHZEPlafCZ/IU1eSG7X+t1TW39Ja77LGPpOwAwcDPWZdrvHscsfgIt+ZPu37Rtgz0MRUjO UKF7bj4xNDXQeHcLi1GvUhYZ2g6f0dRPmL7EZfbXqNNDE/IOu3/b5JVfry8DT8Vcu9N0XejlDgic jIuYGHzNaGtbvdTLIXJ4DqxxlnCnOQKjhagEKuLSExxov/ex1D5pTgvUGv4wSytbsM3JZLzvt/Ye aVSetlaGpIGxPWaoqL63CHqXkByhMS+4ayUpOtEhdxekWDmK9g==
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/fB-JzJb6CDphvV9gzn3pQH2WDqU>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:29:07 -0700
Subject: Re: [Roll] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:49:02 -0000

Hello Murray,

Please excuse the unusually long delay it has taken for us to respond to 
your comments.

Regarding the following:

 >  Murray Kucherawy No Objection
 > Comment (2021-04-22)
 > No email
 > send info

 > I concur with Roman's DISCUSS, especially around the use of SHOULD.
 > I'd go further and ask why that's not a MUST, or in the alternative,
 > suggest that you provide some guidance around why an implementer might
 > legitimately decide against doing what the SHOULD says.

See also the response to Roman Danyliw.  An implementer might decide to
use a proprietary security configuration, and not use the security
specification provided by RPL.  Alternatively, certain closed systems
will not be vulnerable to insertion of a rogue router, and cost savings
or performance improvements might be realized by eliminating unnecessary
security operations.


 > I also support John's DISCUSS.

We hope that John's DISCUSS has been resolved.


 > The document shepherd writeup is more than two years old.


This project fell off of my plate due to changes in employment and
many urgent distractions.  Please excuse the delay.



 > In Section 2, although "AODV-RPL Instance" is defined, it is present 
nowhere
 > in the document.  Also "ART Option" doesn't seem to be ordered correctly.


Deleting "AODV-RPL Instance" is an improvement.  Thanks for the observation.

It is logical to describe the RREQ option before describing how
the ART option provides the Targets of the route discovery operation.
Alternatively, the options could be presented in alphabetical order, which
would put RREP before RREQ, but that also seems counerintuitive.


 > In Section 9, I suggest being clear that what you're
 > actually updating are the named sub-registries of the
 > "Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)" registry.


The text in Section 9 will refer to the "Subregistry" instead of
"Registry".  A sentence is to be included in the initial section
as follows:

     The Subregistries in this section are the named sub-registries of the
         "Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)" registry.

Thank you for these useful comments.

Regards,
Charlie P.




On 4/22/2021 12:44 AM, Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker wrote:
> Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I concur with Roman's DISCUSS, especially around the use of SHOULD.  I'd go
> further and ask why that's not a MUST, or in the alternative, provide some
> guidance around why an implementer might legitimately decide against doing what
> the SHOULD said.
>
> The document shepherd writeup is more than two years old.
>
> In Section 2, although "AODV-RPL Instance" is defined, it is present nowhere in
> the document.  Also "ART Option" doesn't seem to be ordered correctly.
>
> In Section 9, I suggest being clear that what you're actually updating are the
> named sub-registries of the "Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks
> (RPL)" registry.
>
>
>