Subject: [DMM] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-04: (with COMMENT)

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 13:32:46 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params-04: 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-dmm-lma-controlled-mag-params/

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

Substantive:

Security Considerations: Seems like more is needed here. Do you mean to
say that none of these parameters add any security considerations that
were not there for existing headers? If that's the case, please say so,
and why people believe that to be the case.

Editorial:
- Abstract: Can you mention what sort of parameters this contemplates?
(At a very high level.)

- 5, 2nd paragraph: "MUST be extended " seens like a statement of fact.
-- "parameters MUST be defined" Doesn't this document define them?