[dnsdir] Dnsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-10

Jim Reid via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Sun, 16 October 2022 10:22 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jim Reid via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: dnsdir@ietf.org
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <166591575298.23197.14153117028859497425@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2022 03:22:32 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsdir/YHBhFV3X2SwUtt_xXpgMQ3eGXHE>
Subject: [dnsdir] Dnsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5933-bis-10

Reviewer: Jim Reid
Review result: Ready with Nits

The I-D is a no brainer. It requests a code point for a new crypto algorithm
for Secure DNS and deprecates one for an algorithm that has been obsoleted.

Some language nits.

1) The text in 4.1 "algorithm number 23 is used here as an example..." should
be moved to earlier in the document, before any of the examples are shown.

2) In 2.2 "in the private key file, it must be in one line" should be deleted.

3) The text at the start of 3.1 does not scan well and is confusing. The
private key shown in the ID does not consist of an MX record.

[dnsdir] Dnsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dn… Jim Reid via Datatracker