Re: [kitten] Gen-art LC review: draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-02

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, Robert Sparks wrote:

> 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
>
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-02
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review Date: 21 Oct 2016
> IETF LC End Date: 2 Nov 2016
> IESG Telechat date: Not yet scheduled on a telechat
>
> Summary: Ready with nits
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Shouldn't the IANA considerations instruct IANA to update the registries at
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/kerberos-parameters/kerberos-parameters.xhtml
> to update the three rows that currently point to 6112 to point to this
> document instead (or at least in addition to 6112)?

Yes, thanks for spotting that.

> Micro-nit: There is a 2119 MUST carried forward from RFC6112 that could be
> improved if the group is willing. "Care MUST be taken by the TGS to not
> reveal". I would suggest "The TGS MUST NOT reveal...". If you need to further
> highlight care, add a sentence that says "Implementers need to be particularly
> careful when addressing this requirement." It is a very small nit - please
> feel free to ignore it.

That looks like a good change to me.  Folks on kitten@, does anyone think
otherwise?  If we do not get any objections, I think we can include that
in an RFC Editor Note.

-Ben