Re: [Anima] draft-richardson-anima-ace-constrained-voucher

Hi Jim,

thanks for the encouragement.

Jim Schaad schreef op 2018-04-27 23:24:
> A fast review of the document, but I have no problems with having it
> adopted.
> 
> * In section 1 para #4 you appear to have a formatting error where a 
> list
> was supposed to exist.
You mean that a list of omitted sections should be added?
> 
> * Section 5 - you have a return of multiple items with the same rt 
> value.
> However I would not want to have to filter through the list of return 
> values
> to figure out which is the "root" one.  Should this example have the
> rt=ace.est attribute on all of the links?

The example is an example and people can decide to do it differently.
Two alternatives:
- only return the root collection
- define additional rt values per resource

You have a preference? I prefer the first approach
> 
> *  Section 5  the description of ct=16 is not quite correct as it is 
> missing
> the encrypt0 subtype.  This text might lead people to conclude that any
> application/cose type can use 16

Thanks, Will improve the description.
> 
> * Suggest a strong recommendation on not use cmsVersion=1 to make your 
> life
> easier.

Thanks for the suggestion.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list
> Anima@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima