Subject: [Idr] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy-20: (with COMMENT)

From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 04:02:32 -0800

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy-20: 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-open-policy/

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

DOWNREF [RFC7908] from this Proposed Standard to Informational RFC7908.
It doesn't look like RFC7908 needs to be a normative reference, so
citing this informationally should address this.

Document still refers to the "Simplified BSD License", which was corrected in
the TLP on September 21, 2021. It should instead refer to the "Revised BSD
License".

Thanks to Gyan S. Mishra for their General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/bnQ6_d1J8TSN6zw-579JvK8bxkQ).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

Section 1. , paragraph 4, nit:
-    This document specifies a means of replacing the operator driven
-                                                             ^
+    This document specifies a means of replacing the operator-driven
+                                                             ^

Section 4. , paragraph 11, nit:
-    the ingress of the local AS, i.e., if the remote AS is noncompliant
+    the ingress of the local AS, i.e., if the remote AS is non-compliant
+                                                              +

Section 3.1. , paragraph 7, nit:
> , if the BGP Role Capability is sent but one is not received, the BGP Speake
>                                     ^^^^
Use a comma before "but" if it connects two independent clauses (unless they
are closely connected and short).

Section 4. , paragraph 8, nit:
> fied in this document are NOT RECOMMENDED to be used between autonomous syste
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The verb "RECOMMENDED" is used with the gerund form.

Section 4. , paragraph 13, nit:
> epresent itself as any one of several different ASes. This should not be a p
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider using "several".

Section 7. , paragraph 2, nit:
> will limit route propagation in an unpredictable way. 8. References 8.1. Norm
>                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider replacing this phrase with the adverb "unpredictably" to avoid
wordiness.

These URLs in the document can probably be converted to HTTPS:
 * http://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/bgp-parameters.xhtml#bgp-parameters-2

---

From: Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2022 04:13:30 -0800

On January 20, 2022 at 7:02:33 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:

Lars:

Hi!  Thanks for the review!

...
> citing this informationally should address this.

I believe rfc7908 should be Normative because it explains concept of
route leaks, which is what this document is addressing.  Ben suggested
adding a couple more references to it (in other parts of the text) to
reinforce its importance.

> the TLP on September 21, 2021. It should instead refer to the "Revised BSD

We'll take care of updating the boilerplate.

Thanks!

Alvaro.