IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Gen-art] Gen-art (second) LC review: draft-hansen-scram-sha256

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Tue, 04 August 2015 18:43 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 192891ACD82; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 11:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iaSy-7Q1olVJ; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 11:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95BD71ACDD6; Tue, 4 Aug 2015 11:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unnumerable.local (pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t74IhPaf018385 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:43:25 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host pool-71-170-237-80.dllstx.fios.verizon.net [71.170.237.80] claimed to be unnumerable.local
Message-ID: <55C107C7.9020001@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 13:43:19 -0500
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-hansen-scram-sha256@ietf.org, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <551D8D6E.8010307@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <551D8D6E.8010307@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/6irPrZxwMDsBsXOY3odFwIwzhDc>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-art (second) LC review: draft-hansen-scram-sha256
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2015 18:43:33 -0000

(apologies to the genart list who will see this as a duplicate):

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-hansen-scram-sha256
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 04-Aug-2015
IETF LC End Date: 25-Aug-2015
IESG Telechat date: not yet on any telechat

Summary: Ready for publication as a Proposed Standard

The change to PS addresses the concern I expressed in the review below.
miniscule-nit: I still think the extra URI section after the references 
is not needed.

RjS

On 4/2/15 1:41 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
>
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.
>
> Document: draft-hansen-scram-sha256
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review Date: 2Apr2015
> IETF LC End Date: 24Apr2015
> IESG Telechat date: (if known)
>
> Summary: Ready for publication as Informational, with nits that should 
> be considered.
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Nit:
> It raises flags for me when an Informational document uses "Updates" 
> on a standards track document.
> I would argue that this does _not_ update 5802. IANA did the things 
> that 5802 requested, and this document
> is requesting something else that happens to change those things. That 
> makes this more of a "see also" than
> a "the protocol changed", and I think the Updates should be removed.
>
> I don't feel super strongly about the difference in _this particular 
> case_, hence its classification as a Nit.
> But for consistency, and avoiding the issue of having an Informational 
> update a PS, I hope you choose to remove it.
>
> Editorial comment:
> The URLs in the references section seem superfluous since you've 
> already expanded them in the introduction?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email