Subject: [OPSAWG] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 00:37:00 -0700

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds-12: Discuss

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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I may have missed something, but why does Section 5 advocate for use of HTTPS
to fetch geofeed files in the second paragraph, and then FTP in the seventh? 
Which is right?  Or perhaps both are right, but there's some context being
assumed here that I don't have.  In any case, please clarify.

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

Nice job on the shepherd writeup.

In Section 5, "https" should be "HTTPS" since you're describing a protocol and
not a URI scheme (or if you meant to do the latter, please say so).

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 05:34:08 -0700

> I may have missed something, but why does Section 5 advocate for use
> of HTTPS to fetch geofeed files in the second paragraph, and then FTP
> in the seventh?

the former is for getting one file through direct reference.  the latter
is bulk transfer of the totality of the repository's data through bulk
query.

> In Section 5, "https" should be "HTTPS" since you're describing a
> protocol and not a URI scheme (or if you meant to do the latter,
> please say so).

sure

randy

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 07:26:59 -0700

> is bulk transfer of the totality of the repository's data through bulk

Ah, thanks, I did miss that subtlety.  I suggest something like this to
spell it out for people like me:

OLD:

   To minimize the load on RIR whois [RFC3912
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3912>] services, use of the
   RIR's FTP [RFC0959 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc0959>]
services SHOULD be the preferred access.  This
   also provides bulk access instead of fetching by brute force search
   through the IP space.

NEW:

   To minimize the load on RIR whois [RFC3912
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3912>] services, use of the
   RIR's FTP [RFC0959 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc0959>]
services SHOULD be the preferred access for
   retrieval of the entire repository.  This provides bulk access
   instead of fetching by brute force search through the IP space.

-MSK