Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up-04: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-grow-bmp-peer-up/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the work done in this document. Some editorial suggestions/comments below (they can be ignored): Should BMP be expanded in the abstract (or even in the title) ? Unsure whether the leading text of section 3 is useful as the 3.* subsections are rather short and clear. Section 2, suggest to use "UTF-8 string" as the name; is it useful to define this type, which is used only once ? Section 3.1, isn't there some contradictions between `The Information field contains *a* string (Section 2)` and `If *multiple* strings are included` ? It is at least unclear to me. Section 3.3, defining the semantic and syntax of "information" in the description of "Information Type" seems weird and unusual. Section 5, it is a matter of taste of course, but isn't `This rearrangement of deck chairs` a little too informal ? _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- grow@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to grow-le...@ietf.org
