[Sidrops] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-same-origin-02

Niclas Comstedt via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Sun, 01 September 2024 11:22 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from [10.244.2.118] (unknown [104.131.183.230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97808C151080; Sun, 1 Sep 2024 04:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Niclas Comstedt via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.23.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <172518972816.908180.2481429545145281610@dt-datatracker-68b7b78cf9-q8rsp>
Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2024 04:22:08 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: TGVUPINI5W3YUQ4AZ6NH6QPYXBLHMCEE
X-Message-ID-Hash: TGVUPINI5W3YUQ4AZ6NH6QPYXBLHMCEE
X-MailFrom: noreply@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-sidrops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-same-origin.all@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Reply-To: Niclas Comstedt <nco@comstedt.net>
Subject: [Sidrops] Opsdir early review of draft-ietf-sidrops-rrdp-same-origin-02
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/QWGvy1C2YFxeNbh30SDtutZmnXY>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:sidrops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:sidrops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:sidrops-leave@ietf.org>

Reviewer: Niclas Comstedt
Review result: Ready

Hi

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. Document
editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
comments.

I have no operational concerns with the doc, it's concise, well written and clear.

Regards,
   Niclas