[Id-event] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-15: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 14 February 2023 19:17 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers@ietf.org, secevent-chairs@ietf.org, id-event@ietf.org, yaronf.ietf@gmail.com, yaronf.ietf@gmail.com
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
Message-ID: <167640224839.60504.2588738073892444427@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 11:17:28 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/id-event/8dTG5U_OVQIrDW4fumIdaxgp9YU>
Subject: [Id-event] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-15: (with COMMENT)

Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers-15: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-secevent-subject-identifiers/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Email Canonicalization:

some providers treat the local part of the email address as
case-insensitive as well, and consider "user@example.com",
"User@example.com", and "USER@example.com" as the same email
address.

"some" is an interesting word choice for "basically every implementation
currently deployed". More seriously, an example of where dots (".") are
optional would be a better example as there are actually servers which
do and which do not treat these as equivalent. Whereas for case sensitivity,
that ship sailed a decade ago. However, the overarching question is, why
should email canonicalization be done in the first place? Isn't that
better done at the receiver of the secevent? Or is that what is implied
in section 3.1 (as it doesnt talk about the producer or consumer at all)

In 8.2.1. Registry Contents, should the change controller be IETF, not IESG ?

NITS:

The layout in Section 4.1 makes it appear the Figure descriptions are above
the example instead of below it and makes things confusing. I'd recommend some
changes in whitespace / lines there.

8.1.3 Format Name: email is the only entry not using quotes (eg "email")

[Id-event] Paul Wouters' No Objection on draft-ie… Paul Wouters via Datatracker