[openpgp] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-12: (with COMMENT)

Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 13 December 2023 09:59 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 126F2C14F61F; Wed, 13 Dec 2023 01:59:08 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh@ietf.org, openpgp-chairs@ietf.org, openpgp@ietf.org, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.0.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Éric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <170246154806.35325.17958083880636656421@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 01:59:08 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/AlXohkfP8_osu__2jXdLin6NsDI>
Subject: [openpgp] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2023 09:59:08 -0000

Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-12: 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-openpgp-crypto-refresh/



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


# Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-12

Thank you for the work put into this document. The content is above my
expertise, hence I only did a quick review (else I would have balloted YES).
The reviewed content is usually easy to read.

Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be
appreciated even if only for my own education).

I hope that this review helps to improve the document,

Regards,

-éric

# COMMENTS (non-blocking)

## The most concise shepherd's write-up

The justification for the intended status is just "PS"... not even expanded...

## Abstract

Isn't the 2nd paragraph (especially the first sentence) applicable to all
standards track document? I.e., why not removing it ? (and I have noted the
very rough consensus about this I-D based on the shepherd write-up).

## Section 3.5

Should another time epoch be specified ? Using the 1970 Unix epoch will cause a
problem in 2038, a not too distant future. Why didn't this revised OpenPGP
propose alternative epoch ?

## IANA registries

Should this I-D be an opportunity to reserve some registry values for a FCFS
allocation ?