[Emu] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob-04: (with COMMENT)

[Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-emu-eap-noob-04: No Objection

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-emu-eap-noob/



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

All comments below are about potential very minor issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools, so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need
to let me know what you did with these suggestions.

Section 8.2, paragraph 2, nit:
>    [BluetoothPairing]
>               Bluetooth, SIG, "Simple pairing whitepaper", Technical
>               report , 2007.

Add URL?

Section 1, paragraph 6, nit:
-    Many proprietary OOB configuration methods exist for specific IoT
+    Many proprietary out-of-band (OOB) configuration methods exist for
specific IoT +                     +++++++++++++   +

Section 1, paragraph 6, nit:
-    use of a user-assisted out-of-band (OOB) channel.  The device
-                           -------------   -
+    use of a user-assisted OOB channel.  The device

Section 3.1, paragraph 10, nit:
-    Success.  The reason is that, while EAP allows delays between the
-                                -
+    Success.  The reason is that while EAP allows delays between the

Section 6.4, paragraph 2, nit:
-    process.  For example, we verified the correctness of the tiebreaking
+    process.  For example, we verified the correctness of the tie-breaking
+                                                                 +

Section 3.3.2, paragraph 3, nit:
> ication | | | channel but it is included in the computation |
>               ^^^^^^^^^^^
Use a comma before 'but' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they
are closely connected and short).

Section 3.3.2, paragraph 3, nit:
>  to the OOB | | | channel and it is encoded as a JSON object of |
>                   ^^^^^^^^^^^
Use a comma before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they
are closely connected and short).

Section 3.3.2, paragraph 3, nit:
> r | | | to the OOB channel and it is encoded as a JSON | |
>                    ^^^^^^^^^^^
Use a comma before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they
are closely connected and short).

Section 3.4.2, paragraph 11, nit:
> ause the server does not store previous keys and it never rolls back a
cryptosuite up >                                         ^^^^^^^^ Use a comma
before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are closely
connected and short).

Section 3.5, paragraph 2, nit:
> on. The auxiliary function H is a hash function and it is taken from the
negotiated cryp >                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Use a
comma before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are
closely connected and short).

Section 3.5, paragraph 8, nit:
>  keys are exchanged. Input Z is the fresh shared secret from the ECDHE
exchange with >                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Make sure that
the adjective 'fresh' is correct. Possibly, it should be an adverb (typically
~ly) that modifies 'shared'. Possibly, it should be the first word in a
compound adjective (hyphenated adjective). Possibly, it is correct.

Section 3.5, paragraph 11, nit:
> ed for application- layer security. Further output bytes are used internally
by EAP >                                     ^^^^^^^ Did you forget a comma
after a conjunctive/linking adverb?

Section 3.6.5, paragraph 3, nit:
>  device may not have the capability for many different error indications to
the user and it MA >                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Consider using "many".

Section 3.6.5, paragraph 3, nit:
> y different error indications to the user and it MAY use the same indication
as in >                                      ^^^^^^^^ Use a comma before 'and'
if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are closely connected and
short).

Section 4, paragraph 4, nit:
> ing. The | | | SSID is a ASCII string.
>                        ^
Use "an" instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g.
'an article', 'an hour'.

Section 5.3, paragraph 5, nit:
> tion Required" as defined in [RFC8126], with the exception of the range
6001-6999. This range is res >                                        
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Consider using "except" or "except for"

Section 6.1, paragraph 3, nit:
>  Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features described in the
current >                                         ^^^^^^^^^^ Consider using
"all the".

Section 6.1, paragraph 4, nit:
> ion. The implementation supports two dimensional QR codes and NFC as example
out-of-band >                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This word is
normally spelled with a hyphen.

Section 6.2, paragraph 3, nit:
>  Coverage: This implementation includes all of the features described in the
current >                                         ^^^^^^^^^^ Consider using
"all the".

Section 7.2, paragraph 4, nit:
> ber, of the peer device. Compared to a fully certificate- based
authentication, however, EAP- >                                       
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You used an adverb ('fully') instead of an adjective, or a
noun ('certificate') instead of another adjective.

Section 7.5, paragraph 2, nit:
> e omitted unless some critical data has changed and it cannot be updated on
the applicat >                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^ Use a comma
before 'and' if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are closely
connected and short).

"Appendix D.", paragraph 3, nit:
>  RECOMMENDED length of 60 characters or less: https://<host>[:<port>]/[<path>]
>                                         ^^^^
Did you mean "fewer"? The noun characters is countable.

"Appendix F.", paragraph 9, nit:
>  lengths to 32 bytes. * Less data in the persistent EAP-NOOB associa
>                         ^^^^
Did you mean "fewer"? The noun data is countable.

These reference issues exist in the document:
 * No reference entries found for:
     [PeerId], [NewNAI], [SleepTime], [ErrorInfo],
     [PKp2], [PKs2], [PeerInfo], [1], [ServerInfo]

These URLs in the document did not return content:
 * https://<host>[:<port>]/[<path
 * https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.800-56Ar3.pdf