Christopher Inacio has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-grow-nrtm-v4-09: 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-nrtm-v4/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you to Watson L. for the SEC review.

Thanks for the effort of creating this draft and attempting to fix an insecure
data distribution problem.

* As a general comment, I'm concerned about the lack of specificity on the JWS
cryptography.  IANA has a lot of registered options for JSON Web Signatures,
algorithms, compression, etc.  Every client implementation has build all of
those options in order to handle anything the server creates?  Is there a
mandatory to implement sub-set of those?

* Being more specific about the Key, key lifetime, etc. would be useful here;
that seems a not well defined

* As a general comment, I'm concerned about the lack of specificity on the JWS
cryptography.  IANA has a lot of registered options for JSON Web Signatures,
algorithms, compression, etc.  Every client implementation has build all of
those options in order to handle anything the server creates?  Is there a
mandatory to implement sub-set of those?

* I think in the terminology it would be helpful to be very clear that
`database` in this context is the collection of IRR snapshot and delta files;
it does not refer to any type of RDBMS or similar system.  (That is fairly
clear already, but I don’t think it would hurt to be extra explicit.)

* > 260    Version  An incremental number that identifies the IRR Database at a
  > 261       particular point in time.
  I think this can be more clear, maybe something like (I’m sure you can do
  better, but): `Version - A monotonically increasing number that identifies a
  particular IRR Database data version, scoped by a Session Identifier,  at a
  particular point in time` `Session Identifier - A generated identifier which
  defines a particular instance of a copy of the IRR database upon which
  Snapshot Files, Delta Files, and Notifications are associated`



_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to