Subject: [Ntp] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-23: (with COMMENT)

From: Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:31:43 -0700

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp-23: 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-ntp-using-nts-for-ntp/

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

Thanks for a well-written document.  I have one small, non-blocking question:
Section 4.1.6 says, “the Critical Bit SHOULD NOT be set.”  Why “SHOULD NOT”
rather than “MUST NOT”?  Under what conditions might a server set it, and why? 
(Similar question for other “SHOULD NOT set” cases in the document.)

---

From: Ragnar Sundblad <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 15:49:06 +0100

Hello Barry,

Thank you for your comments!

We have had a lot of comments, and some followups, and we are working
them through, still working on the last ones.
We are most grateful for all the feedback!

> On 12 Mar 2020, at 03:31, Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

Our reasoning is that in future use with extensions for other protocols,
or with just variations of the use with NTPv4, what is critical or not
may vary.

We do not want to disallow or be incompatible with any such use in this
specification.

Best regards,

Ragnar