[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat Review of draft-seantek-ldap-pkcs9-06
Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com> Thu, 01 September 2016 02:14 UTC
Return-Path: <mamille2@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D403712D7C4; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.069
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.069 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 6LqIqGEei2GA; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78E4012B068; Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2183; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1472696073; x=1473905673; h=from:subject:to:message-id:date:mime-version; bh=YVJrrF/dXdQZt5PXv5a1wdDIm5XxUXDGzYuuemQhBlw=; b=Dj89eZdv4YzcEx/zjBjhppxLwQLRcy+cTohWACBIWafS8AmVUbidm5A4 rQ6YTTsPE4XN/aq6nwKPpFCy7eDE+0XZKRhSW85Q44nHPKgCXg3/AKG9p 4ww3yZkVN1FaaZ6D/u/2gt7RKfE2dU36IUJLEEJxhlNijzCvSnS3+z9c6 Y=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 496
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CPBwDRjcdX/5RdJa1dg1ABAQEBAR5XKlIBonUMAQEBAQEBBQGBEJQKggEkhXiBTjgUAQIBAQEBAQEBXieFC4EFLgJgDAgBAYhEDq4NjHAjDoVngkCHNYJigloFjxqKNAKDPoFzb4kRgW1OhA+DEYV8jEiDeR42hFAdNYZrAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,264,1470700800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="146872549"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Sep 2016 02:14:32 +0000
Received: from [10.24.13.183] ([10.24.13.183]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u812EVxX020641; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 02:14:31 GMT
From: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>
To: draft-seantek-ldap-pkcs9.all@ietf.org, gen-art@ietf.org
Message-ID: <18c6ad7f-393d-a0b2-e5f6-7ccb84ee4da1@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 20:14:30 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="r9lsCXTnRmvR0CCANxhIlw13kaTXUvaBQ"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/8sgOhOx0rksDaY4G3_kHmVyp6Co>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat Review of draft-seantek-ldap-pkcs9-06
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 02:14:35 -0000
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq >. Document: draft-seantek-ldap-pkcs9-06 Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller Review Date: 2016-08-31 IETF LC End Date: 2016-08-17 IESG Telechat date: 2016-09-01 Summary: This document is ready to be published as an Informational document. I'll note that while idnits complains about "non-RFC6890-compliant IPv4 addresses", these are actually OIDs and I believe are perfectly valid; this nit should be ignored. Major issues: NONE Minor issues: NONE Nits/editorial comments: NONE