[Iotops] Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-iotops-security-protocol-comparison-06

[Francesca Palombini <[e-mail]>]

Hi Thomas,

Thank you for your review! Your comments have been incorporated in the latest version (just posted, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-iotops-security-protocol-comparison-08) - we went with "basic" to identify the "classical" version of DTLS and TLS used (no compression, no Connection ID), hopefully that works.

Thanks again,
Francesca

>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 at 19:49, Alexey Melnikov [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Dear IOTOPS participants,
> >
> > This message is starting 2 weeks WGLC on
> > draft-ietf-iotops-security-protocol-comparison-06 ("Comparison of CoAP
> > Security Protocols") that will end on May 2nd 2024. If you've read the
> > document and think that it is ready (or not ready) for publication as an
> > RFC, please send a message in reply to this email or directly to IOTOPS
> > chairs ([e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>) If you have detailed comments, these
> > would also be very helpful at this point.
> >
> > As a reminder, we will park this document after WGLC until the time when
> > its depencies are stable/complete.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Alexey, for IOTOPS chairs
>
> I have reviewed -06 with a focus on the (D)TLS parts and it looks good to me.
>
> Nits:
> * (multiple occurrences) s/increases with/increases by/
> * §3.2.1.2 s/he overhead/the overhead/
> * consider renaming §4.[2-5].1 to "Vanilla", "Ordinary" or similar to
> avoid repeating the parent's heading
>
> Cheers! Thanks for your work on this.