Subject: [core] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-26: (with COMMENT)

From: Erik Kline via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:27:41 -0800

Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-26: 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-core-resource-directory/

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

[[ comments ]]

Clearing my discuss from -25.  Thanks for the thoughtful feedback.

[ section 4.1.1 ]

* I just thought of one thing that might help save some RA space:

In the case (perhaps not the common case) there the RDAO IPv6 address is the
same as the source address of the RA itself, the length field could be just 1
and the IPv6 address field omitted.

I don't think this complicates parsing too much -- the length is either 3 =>
address included or 1 => address is the RA source address (a link-local
address).

I'll leave it up to the group to consider whether this is a useful optimisation
or not.  Perhaps this idea has already been considered and rejected, though.