[Sidrops] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify-04: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 13 August 2018 22:04 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify@ietf.org, Keyur Patel <keyur@arrcus.com>, sidrops-chairs@ietf.org, keyur@arrcus.com, sidrops@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <153419785019.25045.6300199280712430764.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 15:04:10 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/zV2O2mtUUtKnSNOdWMCDabUVgq0>
Subject: [Sidrops] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify-04: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-ov-clarify-04: 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-sidrops-ov-clarify/



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

Thanks for your work on this. I have only minor typographical nits to suggest
changes for; these don't warrant a new version of the document (as I'm sure
they'll be caught in RFC Editor review), but should probably be corrected if a
new version of the document is produced prior to advancing it:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract:

>  document is meant to clarify possible misunderstandings causing those
>  mis-implementations; and thus updates RFC6811 by clarifying that all

Nit: "...RFC 6811..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

§1:

>  Deployment of RPKI-based BGP origin validation is hampered by, among
>  other things, vendor mis-implementations in two critical areas, which

Nit: "...areas: which..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

§3:

>  neighbors about propagation of Invalid routes.  For this reason,
>  [RFC6811] says

Nit: "...says:"

[Sidrops] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf… Adam Roach
Re: [Sidrops] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-… Randy Bush