Subject: [Ace] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-ace-aif-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 01:38:40 -0800

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ace-aif-06: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-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-ace-aif/

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

The IANA review of this document seems to not have concluded yet.

Found terminology that should be reviewed for inclusivity; see
https://www.rfc-editor.org/part2/#inclusive_language for background and more
guidance:

 * Term "traditionally"; alternatives might be "classic", "classical",
   "common", "conventional", "customary", "fixed", "habitual", "historic",
   "long-established", "popular", "prescribed", "regular", "rooted",
   "time-honored", "universal", "widely used", "widespread".

Thanks to David Schinazi for their General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/_BxkOEZJVOgcLQdyMj3dV0NYRB0).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 2.2. , paragraph 3, nit:
-    conditionalized access based on state outside the identification of
-               ----

Section 1. , paragraph 3, nit:
> structure that can be used for many different applications and as a specific
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider using "many".

Section 1.1. , paragraph 4, nit:
> ically secured (or transmitted in a secure way). This section discusses the i
>                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider replacing this phrase with the adverb "securely" to avoid wordiness.

Section 2. , paragraph 3, nit:
> identified (e.g., as part of the armor around it). The generic model of such
>                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider using "the surrounding armor".

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 23:15:05 +0100

Hi Lars,

my apologies for again using an older word.

> On 2022-03-07, at 10:38, Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 

This is just due to the updated I-D revision, IIUC.
The expert reviews are in.

>   "time-honored", "universal", "widely used", "widespread".

Fixed in https://github.com/cabo/ace-aif/commit/816eccf
(We actually don’t need to emphasize the “time-honored” aspect here; “capability list” is just terminology that some readers that care about authorization will know.)

> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/_BxkOEZJVOgcLQdyMj3dV0NYRB0).

Just a data point — languagetool had pointed me to each of these and I had already decided to stay with the original words.  There should be a “<sic>…</sic>” in RFCXML :-).  (It also pointed me to a dozen other places that I did change.)

Grüße, Carsten