Subject: [Dots] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-11: (with COMMENT)

From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 05:09:09 -0800

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-11: 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-dots-signal-call-home/

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

Hi,

Thanks for this document.

I support both Roman's DISCUSS and Barry's comment, in the sense that the
document could probably benefit from some more guidance about how it is
expected to be deployed.  Perhaps the Applicability Scope should constrain
where it is expected for this protocol to be deployed (e.g. only in an ISP
managed device).  It might also be beneficial to understand when DOTS Signal
Call Home should be deployed instead of the Base DOTS Signal Channel.

One other comment:  I found the introduction text to section 1.1 to be
informative, but it seemed to be a bit of a jump to section 1.2 when it
immediately starts describing call-home as the solution.  I.e. section 1.1
makes it clear as to why running DDOS mitigation in the source network is
beneficial, but doesn't necessarily lead (at least to me) to the reason why
that means adding a reverse control channel to DOTS is the solution.

Regards,
Rob