Subject: [Dcrup] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-13: (with COMMENT)

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:31:02 -0700

Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dcrup-dkim-crypto-13: Yes

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-dcrup-dkim-crypto/

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

Thanks to the authors and working group for the work put in on this document.
I have two editorial updates to suggest.

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

The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC 6376, but the
abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should.

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

§2:

>  The capitalized key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL",
>  "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
>  "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
>  [RFC8174].

This text is almost, but not quite, the boilerplate from RFC 8174. Please update
this paragraph to match the boilerplate.