[v6ops] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-06: (with COMMENT)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc6555bis-06: 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-v6ops-rfc6555bis/



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

Substantive Comments:

- I agree with Adam's comments about normative language.

-4, 2nd paragraph, last sentence:
"across networks" and "network changes" are ambiguous. I think you are talking
about moving a device from one access network to another, but "across networks"
could be interpreted to mean "sending the data across networks". "Network
changes" could refer to changes in network configuration.

-10: I don't understand what you mean by "direct" vs "indirect" security
considerations.

Editorial Comments:

- Abstract: Please mention that this obsoletes 6555 in the abstract. (The intro
already does so.)

- 7.2, last paragraph: The pattern "... recommended at 2 seconds" does not make
grammatical sense. I would assume there are missing words, but I see the same
pattern occur several times in the document. I suggest "recommended to be..."