IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tls-sslv3-diediedie-02

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 09 April 2015 11:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 BE9601A0233 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 04:36:42 -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 t0W7N_FKT8Df for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 04:36:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C67B31A01F9 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 04:36:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220DF2CD11; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:36:39 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nJ6SdcQ4j1TA; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:36:38 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CBF92CC5D; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:36:38 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5A30B7C1-732D-4EA3-B2CB-35B8300A4A16"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <551888FD.6020702@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:36:36 +0300
Message-Id: <938B444E-C0F4-4C7E-8DE9-E0C3124BFB12@piuha.net>
References: <551888FD.6020702@gmail.com>
To: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/kiUxTe-LDVWVaQwLWIg5gQl0dHI>
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Gen Art <gen-art@ietf.org>, Adam Langley <agl@google.com>, "Joseph A. Salowey" <joe@salowey.net>, Alfredo Pironti <alfredo@pironti.eu>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tls-sslv3-diediedie-02
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 09 Apr 2015 11:36:42 -0000

Thanks for your review, Tom. Have you authors seen these comments?

I have balloted NoObj, but wanted to check that the editorial comments were not missed.

Jari

On 30 Mar 2015, at 02:21, Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com> 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-ietf-tls-sslv3-diediedie-02
> Reviewer: Tom Taylor
> Review Date: 29 Mar 2015
> IETF LC End Date: 30 Mar 20154
> IESG Telechat date: (if known)
> 
> Summary: This document is good to go subject to the resolution of nits. Note normative downrefs to Informational RFC 4492 and Historic RFC 6101.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> 1. IDNits has a number of complaints that should be resolved:
>  -- the UPDATES mentions RFC 5246 but it is not identified in the Abstract. Rather, "the TLS RFCs" are cited. Could I suggest adding "and explicitly RFC 5246" after that phrase. I can see where adding the others would get into a bit of a mess because they are obsoleted.
>  -- a second IDNits complaint relates to missing RFC 2119 boilerplate.
>  -- finally, there are several complaints about references, at least one of which is readily fixable.
>  -- the other complaints relate to references.
> 
> 2. Editorial style: Introduction first sentence: I'd suggest moving the phrase "since it was released in 1996" to the beginning of the sentence, followed by a comma.
> 
> 3. Incomplete thought: Introduction final sentence:
> 
> OLD
> SSLv3 now follows.
> 
> NEW
> This view is now extended to include SSLv3.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email