Subject: [OPSEC] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsec-urpf-improvements-03: (with COMMENT)

From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:13:14 -0700

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsec-urpf-improvements-03: 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-opsec-urpf-improvements/

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

(1) I support Alvaro Retana’s DISCUSS point about the needed clarity on
algorithm selection (A vs. B) and the security assumptions being made about
Algorithm A.

(2) Editorial

-- Document header: s/Updates: RFC3704/Updates: 3704/

-- Section 2.1.  Editorial.  s/are maintained which list/are maintained to list/

---

From: "Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 23:21:23 +0000

Hi Roman,

Thank you for your comments.
My responses marked with "[KS:]" below.

________________________________________
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 3:13 PM
...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[KS:] Yes. I am updating the draft per Alvaro's recommendations/suggestions.

(2) Editorial

[KS:] Yes. Done.

[KS:] Done.

Sriram

---

From: Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 03:21:17 +0000

Hi Sriram!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sriram, Kotikalapudi (Fed) [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 7:21 PM
> To: The IESG <[email-masked]>; Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]; Sandra Murphy
> <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]; Sandra Murphy
> <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-opsec-urpf-
> improvements-03: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> (1) I support Alvaro Retana's DISCUSS point about the needed clarity on

Thanks for these updates.  

Roman