Subject: [clue] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-clue-protocol-17: (with COMMENT)

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:28:24 -0800

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-clue-protocol-17: 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-clue-protocol/

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

I found the document to be well written and easy to read. I just had a concern
about the response codes. I did not find text either in this on in
draft-ietf-clue-signaling that describes the behavior that results in a
specific response code. e.g. 402 and 404 seem to have some overlap but there is
no text for when a 404 will be sent to disambiguate it from 402. Likewise for
the other response codes. I did not find any prescriptive behavior that results
in these codes.