Re: [sfc] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-integrity

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Dear Authors,
I should have checked IDnits results early. From me looking at it, two
DownRefs marked as the most severe issues:

   - normative reference to RFC 7665 SFC Architecture
   - normative reference to RFC 8877 Guidelines for Defining Packet
   Timestamps

In my opinion, the former is reasonable as a reader must be familiar with
the SFC architecture. Do you think that the latter reference can be moved
to the Informational References list?

Regards,
Greg

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 9:27 AM Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Dear Authors,
> thank you for your work on this very important and well-written document.
> It is easy to read and grasp the technical concept of the proposed
> solutions. Below, please find my notes and proposals addressing editorial
> nits:
>
>    - s/referred to is/referred to as/
>    - s/integrity protected/integrity-protected/g
>    - s/access to an information/access to information/
>    - s/See for example,/See, for example,/
>    - Is there a need to use the normative language in the following text
>    or make the "should adopt" text more assertive:
>
>       An NSH-aware SF can also be instructed about the behavior it
>       should adopt after consuming a context information that was
>       supplied in the NSH.
>
>
>    - s/a context information/context information/
>    - s/A first level/The first level/
>    - s/A second level/The second level/
>    - s/four octet/four-octet/
>    - s/The documents does not/The document does not/
>    - s/for certain amount/for a certain amount/
>    - s/variable length/variable-length/
>    - s/excluding/, excluding/g
>    - s/In typical deployments/In typical deployments,/
>    - s/used to integrity protect/used to protect the integrity of/g
>    - s/proceeds then/proceeds/
>    - s/been tampered/been tampered with/
>    - s/such those/such as those/
>    - s/out of scope/out of the scope/
>    - s/rate limited/rate-limited/
>    - s/secdir/SecDir/ or extend it completely
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>