[Curdle] Éric Vyncke's Discuss on draft-ietf-curdle-ssh-curves-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-curdle-ssh-curves-10: 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 IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-curdle-ssh-curves/



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

Thank you for the hard work put into this  document.

Please note that I second Mirja's discuss about the 'copying' text. And, please
find below an easy-to-fix DISCUSS and some COMMENTs.

Regards,

-éric

== DISCUSS ==

-- Abstract --

For a standard track document, I find it weird to write 'conventions' rather
than specification. Easy to fix.


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

== COMMENTS ==

-- Section 1 --
" At the time of writing this specification" will look strange in a couple of
years, please state 2019.

-- Section 3 --
I am not a SSH expert, but, can you add a reference to X25519 (in RFC 7748?) if
not obvious for SSH experts ?

== NITS ==

-- Section 1 --
s/This document provide Curve25519/This document provides Curve25519/
s/Curve25519 has been/Curve25519 have been/

>From now on, I am stopping to review for nits, typos and grammar errors. Please
run a spell checker.