Hello Erik,
Revision -23 (soon to be published) should incorporate the remaining issues
(most of the previous ones were fixed in the just released -22). See EV23>
Thank you again for your valuable review
-éric
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Vyncke <evyn...@cisco.com>
Date: Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 22:22
To: Erik Kline <ek.i...@gmail.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: "last-c...@ietf.org" <last-c...@ietf.org>, "op...@ietf.org"
<op...@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-opsec-v6....@ietf.org"
<draft-ietf-opsec-v6....@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-opsec-v6-21
Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org>
Resent-To: Eric Vyncke <evyn...@cisco.com>, Kiran Kumar Chittimaneni
<kk.chittiman...@gmail.com>, Merike Kaeo <mer...@doubleshotsecurity.com>,
<e...@ernw.de>, Ron Bonica <rbon...@juniper.net>, <furr...@gmail.com>, Ignas
Badonas <ibagd...@gmail.com>, <war...@kumari.net>, Gyan Mishra
<hayabusa...@gmail.com>, <hayabusa...@gmail.com>
Resent-Date: Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 22:22
Hello Erik
Thank you again for the review. We have accepted all your nits except those
below (see EV>). They will appear in revision -22
Regards
-éric (the other one)
On 02/12/2019, 17:24, "Erik Kline via Datatracker" <nore...@ietf.org> wrote:
- It's not clear if RFC 2119 text is needed for this document as it is
now.
EV> it does IMHO as we have some cut&paste of text from RFC having those
words.
EV23> thinking twice, completely removed now
- 2.1.5
- Could perhaps more explicitly state that DHCPv6 is not mandatory
to implement per IPv6 Node Requirements (RFC 8504).
EV23> text added
- 2.2
- One might quibble with the statement "the extension header chain
must be be parsed completely". It has to be parsed enough so that
it can be completely traversed, but it need not necessarily be
parsed in a way that a node has to "understand" the contents --
this is how the extension headers are designed, after all.
EV23> text modified into " the extension header chain must be parsed completely
(even if not processed)", I hope that it is clearer now
- 2.4.2
- With the mention of NTP I suddenly thought: should there be
DNS-related text as well, or does that fall within this section
too?
EV> as we mention protocols used by the routers, I would say that DNS is
not really required & relied upon by routers (albeit often use), I would assume
that DNS is simply included in the '...'
- 2.5.3
- The CYMRU link doesn't seem to go to a useful page anymore. :-/
EV> indeed, it looks like CYMRU has become a commercial company :-( unable
to find the previous document :-( removed all links
EV23> found back a CYMRU page that is now also used for bogons
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
