Subject: [Sidrops] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 May 2019 13:09:41 -0700

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying-05: 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-sidrops-rtr-keying/

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

Thanks for making the updates in -04 and -05 to address ekr’s DISCUSSes.  A few
additional items:

(1) Typos:
** Section 5.2.1.  s/operators's/operators'/
** Appendix B.  s/pubic/public/

(2) Section 10
PKI-relying protocols, of which BGPsec is one, have
   many issues to consider - so many, in fact, entire books have been
   written to address them; so listing all PKI-related security
   considerations is neither useful nor helpful.

It seems odd to say there is a large body of knowledge of relevant issues that
won’t be discussed/cited/referenced here.

(2) Appendix B.  The n00b Guide to BGPsec Key Management

It seems derogatory to refer to a section as being for “n00bs”.  I would
recommend alternative language.