Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis-10: 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-hip-rfc5203-bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This bis draft was an improvement. I did have one question. I'm trying to visualize why The registrar indicates the minimum and maximum registration lifetime that it is willing to offer to a requester. A requester SHOULD NOT request registration with lifetime greater than the maximum registration lifetime or smaller than the minimum registration lifetime. is a SHOULD NOT - why would a requester choose to disregard the SHOULD and send a request registration with (for example) a lifetime greater than the maximum registration lifetime? Is the intention for the requester to allow this, and then (for example) cap the lifetime at the maximum registration lifetime? Or is something else supposed to happen? Whatever the intention is, it might be helpful to provide an explanation about that. _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
