[sidr] Ignas Bagdonas' No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: (with COMMENT)

Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona@gmail.com> Wed, 28 March 2018 03:49 UTC

Return-Path: <ibagdona@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B617120724; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 20:49:35 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ignas Bagdonas <ibagdona@gmail.com>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidr-slurm@ietf.org, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, sidr-chairs@ietf.org, morrowc@ops-netman.net, sidr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.76.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <152220897556.29881.11439165736430017715.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 20:49:35 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/egt8fD41SsHXonh7mjfg8_QOPbk>
Subject: [sidr] Ignas Bagdonas' No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 03:49:36 -0000

Ignas Bagdonas has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-07: 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:


A few comments:

1. Document uses all capital form of AND for filters containing both prefixes
and ASNs, and filters containing ASNs and SKIs. That is not part of RFC2119

2. s/Route Origination Authorization/Route Origin Authorization

3. If a local assertion is added without a matching filter, does it take
priority over existing assertion?

4. The term 'putative TA' has been flagged a couple of times in various reviews
as being not known. It does not appear to be formally defined, RFC7730 seems to
be the closest source - while it is not formally defined there either.