[Sidrops] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-6486bis-09: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 03 February 2022 10:43 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidrops-6486bis@ietf.org, sidrops-chairs@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org, morrowc@ops-netman.net, morrowc@ops-netman.net
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-ID: <164388499653.23462.16919739523606949941@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 02:43:17 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/HeKoTC1AKAOGLM7CtBKx-1allSw>
Subject: [Sidrops] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-6486bis-09: (with COMMENT)

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-6486bis-09: 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-6486bis/



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

Using lowercase "not" together with an uppercase RFC2119 keyword is not
acceptable usage. Found: "MUST not"

Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
guidance:

 * Term "man"; alternatives might be "individual", "people", "person".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

Section 5.2. , paragraph 5, nit:
> ion point to effect this operation. Thus the term "fetch" refers to an operat
>                                     ^^^^
A comma may be missing after the conjunctive/linking adverb "Thus".

Section 11.1. , paragraph 11, nit:
> Appendix B. Changes to RFC 6486 In 2019 it came to light that multiple Relyin
>                                    ^^^^
A comma is probably missing here.

Uncited references: [RFC6493], [RFC6482], [RFC8209], and [RFC8488].

Reference [RFC6485] to RFC6485, which was obsoleted by RFC7935 (this may be on
purpose).

[Sidrops] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-iet… Lars Eggert via Datatracker
Re: [Sidrops] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft… Job Snijders