Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis-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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidr-rfc6490-bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - (In response to Ben's comment:) Assuming this change only represents a change to the means to get more anchor information, after you have the public key, and that any additional into is protected with the key I don't think there's any real security change here - this is basically like having an anycast address for the host in the current URI (from the security POV). If that's wrong please do correct me. - tbh, I don't find the new text describing the syntax to be very clear. It says: "...where the URI section is comprised of one of more of the ordered sequence of: 1.1) an rsync URI [RFC5781], 1.2) a <CRLF> or <LF> line break." Exactly what is supposed to separate the URIs? - the example should show >1 URL really _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
