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

[Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Éric Vyncke 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:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the work put into this document.

Please find below one non-blocking COMMENT points.

Special thanks to Chris Morrow for the shepherd's write-up including the
section about the WG consensus (even if I would have appreciated a
justification for the PS status).

I hope that this helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

-- Abstract --
In "then the RP can detect "stale" (valid) data", is "valid" really the right
word to use ? I would naively expect "invalid". Or is it just an indication
that the data *was* valid and is stale? The use of "(.*)" in the abstract was
more to explain the previous word and this use is different and could confuse
the reader.