> -----原始邮件----- > 发件人: "Russ Housley via Datatracker" <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > 发送时间: 2019-10-10 23:02:57 (星期四) > 收件人: secdir@xxxxxxxx > 抄送: draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@xxxxxxxx, ietf@xxxxxxxx, regext@xxxxxxxx > 主题: Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11 > > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review result: Has Issues > > I reviewed this document as part of the Security Directorate's ongoing > effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These > comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Security Area > Directors. Document authors, document editors, and WG chairs should > treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments. > > Document: draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11 > Reviewer: Russ Housley > Review Date: 2019-10-10 > IETF LC End Date: 2019-03-15 > IESG Telechat date: 2019-10-17 > Dear Russ Housley. Thanks a lot for your kind review. > Summary: Has Issues > > > Major Concerns: > > The Abstract ans Section 1 say: "This is a non-standard proprietary > extension." I understand that this is not a standards track document, so > the "non-standard" part makes sense. yes, the WG decided that this document is informational. > However, what is the point of > publishing a "proprietary" extension as an RFC. I would hope that > interoperable implementations is the goal of publication. > If the registry follows this document, both registry and its all registrars should follow this document. Yes, interoperable implementation is very important. > In Section 1, the use of "policy-wise" is unclear. Is this registration > policy or something else? > How about Policy-wise bundling ---> Bundling based on policy > > Minor Concerns: > > None. > > > Nits: > > Section 1: s/label(LABEL)/label (LABEL)/ > - s/(V-tld);/(V-tld)./ > will update it. Thanks a lot. Jiankang Yao > In addition, there are several places in the upper left corner of the > title page: > Internet Engineering Task Force > >
