[art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-14
Sean Turner via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 12 August 2021 03:47 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1946D3A335C; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 20:47:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Sean Turner via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: art@ietf.org
Cc: dots@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.36.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <162874002105.1973.832104527449655362@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Sean Turner <sean+ietf@sn3rd.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 20:47:01 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/XPkObFp8WqvmVbaqF8Rw9iDB1C4>
Subject: [art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-dots-signal-call-home-14
X-BeenThere: art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion <art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/art/>
List-Post: <mailto:art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art>, <mailto:art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 03:47:01 -0000
Reviewer: Sean Turner Review result: Ready Hi! Reviewing this because I got asked. I will note that it appears this document has already been through IETF LC, SECDIR, and GENART among others. These two are pretty minor (and look like a secret secdir review): 1. I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis refers to DTLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13}. Should this I-D also refer to DTLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13} in s1? Pretty sure changing the reference isn't going to slow down publication because this I-D normatively references I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis. 2. Assuming that the answer is yes and you could use (D)TLS1.3 with this protocol, I think you need to say something about or refer to the early data concerns (see s7.2 of I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis). You might consider just expand the 2nd sentence in the 1st para of s8 to also refer to s7.2 or I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis?
- [art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-dots-s… Sean Turner via Datatracker
- Re: [art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-do… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-do… tirumal reddy
- Re: [art] Artart telechat review of draft-ietf-do… Francesca Palombini