Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05: 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-dprive-padding-policy/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (I might ballot "yes" on a more mature version of this as standards track or BCP, should one be offered :-) ) Why is this experimental? What is the nature of the experiment? Even if it's just to get more operational experience, it's worth saying that explicitly. §2: There are a number of lower-case versions of normative keywords. Please consider the boilerplate from RFC 8174. §A.2: ' "Fixed Length Padding" MUST NOT be used except for experimental applications.' This entire draft is experimental. _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
