Subject: [Sidrops] Warren Kumari's Yes on draft-ietf-sidrops-rp-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Warren Kumari via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 07:25:16 -0700

Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sidrops-rp-06: 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-sidrops-rp/

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

Notes for IESG reviewers:
The requirements for relying party software is scattered throughout a bunch of
different RFCs, and are sometimes buried and easy to overlook within these RFCs
- they are generally more descriptive of how the system as a whole should work,
not the responsibilities from each component's view. This has already caused a
number of issues and inconsistencies between implementations, and so a document
like this is needed.  Like with other "Hitchhikers Guide to the XXX protocol"
documents this would be a prime candidate for an "evolving document" type
solution - but in the absence of such a thing, having an RFC is much better
than a draft...