[Sidrops] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-bgpsec-rollover-03: (with COMMENT)

[Mirja Kühlewind <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-bgpsec-rollover-03: 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-bgpsec-rollover/



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

This document really reads like it should be an informational document, or
maybe a BCP. Further, the shepherd write-up says "Internet Standard final
status" but I see Proposed Standard in the datatracker...? I would recommend to
go for BCP if the wg can agree to that.

Also, should ietf-sidr-rtr-keying maybe be a normative reference, or is this
just one example? The use of this reference in section 3.1 isn’t clear to me
with this respect: „The key rollover process is dependent on the key
provisioning mechanisms adopted by an AS [I-D.ietf-sidr-rtr-keying].“