[Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ace-cwt-proof-of-possession-08

Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 04 October 2019 17:44 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C28D12011F; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 10:44:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ace-cwt-proof-of-possession.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, ace@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.104.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <157021105722.1446.14439223392992273252@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2019 10:44:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/UVCtecC52M2UI2dtAHPHocAbYxA>
Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ace-cwt-proof-of-possession-08
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 04 Oct 2019 17:44:17 -0000

Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review result: Ready with Issues

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


Document: draft-ietf-ace-cwt-proof-of-possession-08
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2019-10-04
IETF LC End Date: 2019-10-09
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: For most part the document is ready, but I have a few editorial
comments and an issue.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:

The text says in the Security Considerations that one must ensure that the
might not understand the "cnf" claim, and that applications must ensure that
receivers support it.

Q1: How are you going to ensure that, and why do you have to ensure that? RFC
8392 doesn't even seem to require that one must ensure that the receivers
support CWT.

Q2: For receivers that do support CWT, RFC 8392 says that unsupported claims
must be discarded. If that can't be applied for "cnf" I think you need to
explain why.

Nits/editorial comments:

Q_ED_1: Please use [RFC8392] instead of [CWT] when referencing to RFC 8392.

Q_ED_2: Shall CBOR be enhanced on first occurrence (in the Abstract or
Introduction), or is it on the list of well-known abbreviations?

Q_ED_3: Add a reference for CBOR map on first occurrence.

(I was looking in RFC 7049, and while it mentions maps in many places I could
not find a proper definition for "CBOR map")