[sidr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs-16: (with COMMENT)

["Mirja Kuehlewind" <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-algs-16: 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-sidr-bgpsec-algs/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just a thought: Would it be useful to add an IESG note saying something
like in the sheperd write-up:
 "[...] there are published references
    that preceded the filing of the patent, especially those 
    mentioned in RFC6090.  RFC6090 notes that its descriptions
    "may be useful for implementing the fundamental algorithms without 
    using any of the  specialized methods that were developed in 
    following years.""
I know we usuall don't do things like this. But I'm wondering how someone
who wants to implement this should figure this out otherwise....?