Re: [regext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-06

Barry, Done, draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-07 has been posted. Let us know if you have any additional feedback. Thanks, -- JG James Gould Fellow Engineer jgo...@verisign.com 703-948-3271 12061 Bluemont Way Reston, VA 20190 Verisign.com On 1/26/21,

Re: [regext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-06

All good, and thanks. Go ahead and post a revised I-D when you're ready. >> The answer to all of that might be “no”, but it would be good to… as >> we used to say in school, show your work. > > Yes, the quick answer is that I don't see the server using this as a > source for an attack, b

Re: [regext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-06

Barry, I respond to your feedback embedded below. I saw Martin's reply that I reference for section 3 below. I will publish draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-07 once these items are agreed to. Let me know if you agree with the proposed updates below or if you have any additional propos

Re: [regext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-06

Barry Thanks for your review. Since James Gould is the main author of this draft I think it is better if he comments your suggestions. Nevertheless I try to answer your question about section 3. RFC 5730 chapter 2.6: Zero or more OPTIONAL elements that can be used to provide additional

[regext] AD review of draft-ietf-regext-unhandled-namespaces-06

Thanks for the publication request for this document; here's my AD review. None of this is a big thing, just some easy tweaks. It will need a revised I-D, though, so I'll set the substate accordingly. The Abstract goes into more detail than the Abstract needs to or should. The Introduction corr