Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-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-anima-prefix-management/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - On my first reading, I wondered why this was informational. It seems to seek to standardize protocol elements. The explanation in the shepherd report clarifies that; it would be helpful to include (a perhaps shortened version of) that in the draft. -2: RFC 8174 has boilerplate to address the "only in upper case" part. Please consider using it rather than modifying the 2119 boilerplate. -4.4: "It is therefore important to record all the prefix assignment history." Isn’t this a local policy choice? Perhaps some operator believes in extreme log minimization, does this mean to argue they are mistaken? _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
