Hi Stephen, Thank you for the review. I confirm. The part you quoted from Section 6.1.2 is still valid as is. Cheers, Med > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Stephen Farrell via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > Envoyé : jeudi 19 mai 2022 14:48 > À : secdir@xxxxxxxx > Cc : alto@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode.all@xxxxxxxx; last- > call@xxxxxxxx > Objet : Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-alto-cost-mode-03 > > Reviewer: Stephen Farrell > Review result: Ready > > This document seems ready to me. > > I did have one question - RFC7285 says that servers MUST support > one of the numeric or ordinal cost-modes. It wasn't entirely clear > to me whether it's intended that that remain the case, but I > assume it is, so that e.g. it'd be invalid to have a server that > only supports some new "foo" cost mode. If that's the case, then > this draft is fine. If something else was intended then I guess a > bit more text on that would be needed. > _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
