Return-Path: 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 4CCC121F8688 for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:07:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.259 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.259 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.339, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Sz5bHSbT7ekX for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:07:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (mailgw10.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.61]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974C421F867B for ; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:07:17 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3d-b7c6fae0000045c0-e5-4f67217499ee Received: from esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw10.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1E.48.17856.471276F4; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:07:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.237]) by esessmw0256.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.96]) with mapi; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:07:16 +0100 From: Christer Holmberg To: "gen-art@ietf.org" , "draft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc.all@tools.ietf.org" Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:07:15 +0100 Thread-Topic: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-10 Thread-Index: Ac0Fw76iBDA3ZcbzRWOLmDvbxqOt+w== Message-ID: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852C413D2304@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852C413D2304ESESSCMS0356e_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC Review of draft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-10 X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:07:20 -0000 --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852C413D2304ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-AR= T, please see the FAQ at . Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you m= ay receive. Document: draft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-= 10 Reviewer: Christer Holmberg Review Date: 2012-03-19 IETF LC End Date: 2012-04-09 IESG Telechat date: (if known) 2012-04-09 Summary: The draft is ready for publication, with a couple of edi= torial nits. Major issues: - Minor issues: - Nits/editorial comments: Q1: The "MPI" abbreviation is used throughout the document, but it = is not expanded anywhere, nor is there any reference. Q2: The Abstract says: "The document aims to standardize an optimal but narrow set= of parameters for best interoperability" I think it would to make it more clear what interoperability you refer to. Q3: The Abstract says: "within the framework it defines" However, the framework is not mentioned/clarified/defined a= nywhere in the document, so if you want to talk about a framework I think s= ome clarification is needed. Q4: In the Introduction, please add references to OpenPGP, RSA and = DSA. Also consider expansion on first occurrence. Q5: The document uses "This document", "This specification", "This = draft" and "This standard" terminology. Please use consistent terminology. Q6: In section 5, I don't think you need the "defined in" parts. Si= mply add the reference. Example: "Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algo= rithm (ECDSA) [FIPS 186-3],..." Maybe similar changes can be done in some other parts of th= e document also. Q7: In section 5, consider modifying the following sentence: "The section 9.1. Public-Key Algorithms of [RFC4880] is exp= anded to define the following public key algorithm IDs" To: "This section extends section 9.1 (Public-Key Algorithms) o= r [RFC4880], by defining the following public key algorithm IDs" Q8: Section 5 says: "Applications MUST support ECDSA and ECDH." Please clarify what applications you refer to. I assume you= mean "Applications that implement this specification", or something simila= r... The same comment also applies to section 12.1, and section = 13 (the word is used many times in section 13, but it is enough to clarify = it on first occurrence :) Regards, Christer --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852C413D2304ESESSCMS0356e_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am the assi= gned 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 comment= s you may receive.

 <= /p>

Document:      &nb= sp;             = ;             &= nbsp;       draft-jivsov-openpgp-ecc-10<= /o:p>

Reviewer:     &nb= sp;             = ;             &= nbsp;          Christer Holmbe= rg

Review Date:   &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;            &nb= sp;       2012-03-19

IETF LC End Date:       =              &n= bsp;        2012-04-09

IESG Telechat date: (if known)   2012-04-09 =

 

Summary:           Th= e draft is ready for publication, with a couple of editorial nits.

 

= Major issues:     -

 

Minor issues:  &n= bsp;  -

 

Nits/editorial comments:

 

Q1:   =       The “MPI” abbreviation is used t= hroughout the document, but it is not expanded anywhere, nor is there any r= eference.

 

 

Q2: &nb= sp;       The Abstract says:

 

 &n= bsp;            = ;  “The document aims to standardize an optimal but narrow set o= f parameters for best interoperability”

 

I think it would to m= ake it more clear what interoperability you refer to.

 

 

Q3:      &nbs= p;  The Abstract says:

&nbs= p;

      &nb= sp;         “within the frame= work it defines”

 

       &n= bsp;        However, the framework is no= t mentioned/clarified/defined anywhere in the document, so if you want to t= alk about a framework I think some clarification is needed.

<= p class=3DMsoPlainText> 

&n= bsp;

Q4:     &nbs= p;   In the Introduction, please add references to OpenPGP, RSA a= nd DSA. Also consider expansion on first occurrence.

 

 

Q5:       = ;  The document uses “This document”, “This specific= ation”, “This draft” and “This standard” term= inology. Please use consistent terminology.

 

 

Q6:         In sec= tion 5, I don’t think you need the “defined in” parts. Si= mply add the reference.

 

       &= nbsp;        Example:    =          “Elliptic Curve Digi= tal Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) [FIPS 186-3],…”

<= p class=3DMsoPlainText> 

 &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;  Maybe similar changes can be done in some other parts of the docum= ent also.

 

 

Q7: &nb= sp;       In section 5, consider modifying th= e following sentence:

 

       &nb= sp;        “The section 9.1. Publi= c-Key Algorithms of [RFC4880] is expanded to define the following public ke= y algorithm IDs”

 

       &n= bsp;        To:

 

  &n= bsp;            = ; “This section extends section 9.1 (Public-Key Algorithms) or [RFC48= 80], by defining the following public key algorithm IDs”

 

 

Q8:     &= nbsp;   Section 5 says:

 

      =           “Applications = MUST support ECDSA and ECDH.”

 

      &= nbsp;         Please clarify what a= pplications you refer to. I assume you mean “Applications that implem= ent this specification”, or something similar…

 

  &n= bsp;            = ; The same comment also applies to section 12.1, and section 13 (the word i= s used many times in section 13, but it is enough to clarify it on first oc= currence :)

 

 

Regards,=

 

Christer=

 

 

 

 

= --_000_7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A05852C413D2304ESESSCMS0356e_--