[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-rift-applicability-03

Watson Ladd via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 20 January 2021 04:49 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Watson Ladd via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-rift-applicability.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, rift@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <161111819082.6760.13942493068778566822@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 20:49:50 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/-_Uhiz6i6eCzbM-iZSdtYw778yo>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-rift-applicability-03

Reviewer: Watson Ladd
Review result: Has Nits

I read this document.

I found it had very helpful and informative examples. My one complaint is a
nit. My first issue is that https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7322#section-4.8.5
says all RFCs must have security considerations. Yes, even ones like this one
listing example networks and failures. In this case a short reference to the
security section of RIFT is entirely appropriate. I do have questions about the
empty Acknowledgements section and the Contributors section with one person and
address: seems a bit odd to me.

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ri… Watson Ladd via Datatracker