Subject: [Drip] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-drip-reqs-13

From: Suresh Krishnan via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:07:32 -0700

Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-drip-reqs-??
Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review Date: 2021-06-22
IETF LC End Date: 2021-06-07
IESG Telechat date: 2021-07-01

Summary:

It is a very interesting problem space and this document provides a good
overview along with the references.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

* The term RID is used to mean slightly different things in different locations
of the document. One very obvious example is in this sentence in Page 6

"However, applications of RID beyond RID itself"

probably need to be clarified a bit

* Section 4.1.1.

-> The following sentence fragment in GEN-3 is confusing

"UAS ID is in a registry and identification of which one"

Suggest rewording to

"UAS ID is in a registry and identification of the registry"

if my understanding of the intent is correct.

-> GEN-6: Not sure if "Finger" is a obvious description of this requirement for
somebody who has not read RFC742. Suggest rewording to something more broadly
understandable (e.g. "User Information")

-> It feels like Section 4.1.2. might be better placed before 4.1.1. as it
addressed some of the questions I had on the GEN-* requirements. The other
rationale sections were fine either way, but it may make sense to describe the
rationale consistently before the requirement.s

Nits/editorial comments: