Subject: [PANRG] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-irtf-panrg-questions-09: (with COMMENT)

From: Stephen Farrell via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 08:40:48 -0700

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-irtf-panrg-questions-09: 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.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-panrg-questions/

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

I had a quick read and it seems fine to me.

I had expected to see some mention of the difficulty of meaningfully naming
path elements or on-path routers - "Do you 'trust' a path using 2001:db8::bad,
2001:db8::dead and 2001:db8::f001 for openvpn.service?" not being soemthing
lending itself to being answered with a human or random machine endpoint in
the loop;-)

Similarly, I wondered why longer term state information didn't give rise
to any tricky questions - "Do you want to use the same path you used last
week when you were physically in the office (now that you're back stuck
doing WFH)?"

But maybe the RG considered those questions already covered by some of
those mentioned in the draft, which is ok.