Re: [Sidrops] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify-03
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 10 August 2018 17:21 UTC
Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BE1130F12; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 rdhsfw-TEbPl; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47B4C1286E3; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1foB6b-00076Y-Au; Fri, 10 Aug 2018 17:21:41 +0000
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 10:21:40 -0700
Message-ID: <m2sh3mi1cr.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: rtg-ads@ietf.org, rtg-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify.all@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org, "dhruv.dhody@huawei.com" <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <72ee1d70-d135-a445-75df-65df06fda61a@gmail.com>
References: <72ee1d70-d135-a445-75df-65df06fda61a@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/Bq7IjkUaG5lvXJbHl1BHxJlo5NI>
Subject: Re: [Sidrops] RtgDir review: draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify-03
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 17:21:46 -0000
hi druv, review appreciated. > - The text in RFC6811 uses the term “lookup” and “validation > state”, the > clarification uses the term “mark”. This might be a bit pedantic but > wouldn’t it be better to state the clarification in terms of > RFC6811? <doh> good catch > - Since RFC4271 and RFC6480 are stated as mandatory reading to > understand > this I-D in section 2, shouldn’t they be normative references? i will be interested in others' feedback on this one. i take normative as needed to implement, not as needed to have clue :) > - I agree with the Gen-ART review, that ask for BGP in the title, > in fact > “Prefix Origin Validation” in the title would be better! as i said to a different reviews, it has been changed to "BGP-4 RPKI-Based Origin Validation Clarifications" oh bleep! WARNING: The inline string was truncated because it was too long: BGP-4 RPKI-Based Origin Validation Clarifications s/-4// > - Expand RPKI in Abstract. acl > - The Requirement language phrasing is little different from RFC 8174. rfced will discuss i have pushed -04. i hope the diff does not cause heartburn to anyone. again, thanks! randy