IETF Logo Mail Archive

[apps-discuss] apps-team review of draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-09

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 13 September 2011 17:15 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12AE21F8C51; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.007
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.007 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.030, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nallJSQ3T8re; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1B421F8C4E; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:15:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gyd12 with SMTP id 12so727665gyd.31 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OVUc9CQyoPnmNiJyLEG99nuJ4uN/Xa3oc+f1kXQ8c1w=; b=FfxHCBuBPlaLVXD+nMVEVRN2MWCJA8TjQw2wAY9BPBv+Zg14tqedjbVEoXbk4TLmPc k06z90dAlh1hlG7CLGiGIzynur7mriYz7HOsdM4PWKFK1uKdicjeanCkR413xlwdy7nA 0B3GgpSEZXG1zRCwkbI3brNe5OQt7HD3gB6yc=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.145.10 with SMTP id o10mr35810021yhj.90.1315934273391; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.236.203.68 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:17:53 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: jfkYQfWQh92cqNa1RJmZf4BQb0Y
Message-ID: <CALaySJJfu8T6QZ2fQfAwUL32hgOG9kPkioPO+tQZZLNGf12HNQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters.all@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
Subject: [apps-discuss] apps-team review of draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-09
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:15:48 -0000

I have been selected as the Applications Area Review Team reviewer for
this draft (for background on apps-review, please see
http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/applications-area-review-team ).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-09
Title: The RPKI Ghostbusters Record

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard,
with just some very minor tweaking requested.

--------------------
Major Issues:

Section 1, paragraph 2:
OLD
   lead to the worrisome certificate's or CRL's maintainer.  So, "Who do
   you call?"
NEW
   lead to the worrisome certificate's or CRL's maintainer.  So, "Who you
   gonna call?"
REFERENCE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9We2XsVZfc

--------------------
Minor Issues:

vCard does use the term "type", unfortunately.  The problem is that a
"type" in vCard is generally something different, and in the RFC we
missed some instances of inconsistent use.  But the proper vCard term
for what you want here is "property".  So:

Section 3:
OLD
   An example of an RPKI Ghostbusters Record payload with all types
   populated is as follows:
NEW
   An example of an RPKI Ghostbusters Record payload with all properties
   populated is as follows:

Section 4:
OLD
   The goal in profiling the vCARD is not to include as much information
   as possible, but rather to include as few types as possible while
NEW
   The goal in profiling the vCard is not to include as much information
   as possible, but rather to include as few properties as possible while

OLD
   Per [RFC6350], the BEGIN, VERSION, FN, N, and END types MUST be
   included in a record.  To be useful, one or more of ADR, TEL, and
   EMAIL MUST be included.  Other types MUST NOT be included.
NEW
   Per [RFC6350], the BEGIN, VERSION, FN, N, and END properties MUST be
   included in a record.  To be useful, one or more of ADR, TEL, and
   EMAIL MUST be included.  Other properties MUST NOT be included.

--------------------
Nits:

Throughout: RFC 6350 uses "vCard", while this document uses "vCARD".
It's not a big thing, but it's easy to be consistent with 6350 and
switch to "vCard".

Section 7:
OLD
   Though there is no on the wire protocol in this specification,
NEW
   Though there is no on-the-wire protocol in this specification,

--------------------

Barry

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email