Summary: Needs 8 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Thanks for the draft. It's always good for congestion controls if congestion-based packet losses are disambiguated from other types. A few nits: - Section 1 has a number of acronyms without clear references (DANE, SPF, TLSA). Please define them on first use. - Sec. 3.1.5. Please add a comma after "attempts" - Sec 3.2.4 uses lower case versions of the normative keywords. Selecting a synonym would improve it.
[ballot position under construction] General: Nits: * I tripped almost every time on saying "set FOO bit to 1" and similar because I'm used to "set" implying one and "not set" or "clear" implying zero. In other places the prose does go with simply saying "FOO bit is set". Maybe that's just me though; we'll see how my colleagues feel. Section 1: * Suggest including a reference to RFC4732 in the discussion of amplification attacks. Section 2: * In the discussion of abandoned transition to the SPF type, suggest a reference to RFC6686. Nits: * "Widespread non-response to EDNS queries has lead to ..." -- s/lead/led/ * "Widespread non-response to EDNS options, requires ..." -- remove comma * "... requires recursive servers to have to decide ..." -- s/to have// * "... being present, leads to ..." -- remove comma Section 3.1.2: A nit: * "The exception to this are ..." -- either s/exception/exceptions/ or s/are/is/. Section 3.1.5: A nit: * "While firewalls should not block TCP connection attempts if they do they should ..." -- suggest: "While firewalls should not block TCP connection attempts, those that do should ..." Section 3.2.2: More nits: * "... version 0 queries but ... version numbers that are higher than zero." -- why the digit in one place but prose in the other? Section 4: * Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 could be common factored very easily since most of the text is identical. Section 5: * I've never heard of a "scrubbing service". Is there a reference RFC, or could we include a short definition? * "One needs to take care when choosing a scrubbing service." -- This is vague. What, apart from the prior sentence (whose implications I don't understand), should an operator be looking for? Section 8: Nit: * "Testing is divided into two sections." -- a list follows, so s/./:/ Section 9: * The final paragraph suggests disconnection of broken nameservers. This can have serious non-technical implications as well. That might be worth mentioning. Nit: * "Name server operators ..." -- s/Name server/Nameserver/, to be consistent with the rest of the document