Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-08
review-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-08-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2017-03-27-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2017-03-27
Requested 2017-03-13
Other Reviews Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Sandra Murphy (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Joel Halpern (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -09 by Joel Halpern (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Jouni Korhonen
Review review-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-08-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2017-03-27
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/rIY8rJYFm9SFdpNmyn6OovREJiI
Reviewed rev. 08 (document currently at 10)
Review result Has Nits
Draft last updated 2017-03-27
Review closed: 2017-03-27

Review
review-ietf-dnsop-nsec-aggressiveuse-08-opsdir-lc-korhonen-2017-03-27

I think would be ready if it passed IDnits. I found the document good read and found no sinkholes in it. Pointing up two implementations was also great.

The Proto Write-up seems not be up to date with what IDnits says e.g., when it comes to downrefs, which is what the IDnits complain about.

A couple of editorials:

Lines 118-119 says: "This takes this.." I would reword to something like:
   "This document takes using NXDOMAIN information for more effective caching further."

Lines 396 and 397 uses "is NOT" and "IS making". I would use lower case here. No reason to use capitalized and still non-RFC2119 language.

Line 407 is would be great to indicate since which version of Unbound support has been in place.