[secdir] draft-ietf-suit-report-15 telechat Secdir review

Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 06 October 2025 19:33 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <175977921133.3748794.18308703316596787775@dt-datatracker-6c6cdf7f94-h6rnn>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2025 12:33:31 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: VCTRP7ATPKVBTHPLNRLYH2L5UU3CUT2V
CC: draft-ietf-suit-report.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, suit@ietf.org
Reply-To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Subject: [secdir] draft-ietf-suit-report-15 telechat Secdir review
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/mxOnSHgLMZq-pb6UdB7Vk53koSc>

Document: draft-ietf-suit-report
Title: Secure Reporting of Update Status
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review result: Has Nits

I reviewed this document as part of the Security Directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Security Area
Directors.  Document authors, document editors, and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments.

Document: draft-ietf-suit-report-15
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2025-10-06
IETF LC End Date: 2025-08-11
IESG Telechat date: 2025-10-23

Summary: Has Nits


Major Concerns:  None


Minor Concerns:

Section 5: What does the term "well-informed" really mean here? I read
the sentence without this term an come away with the same understanding.
Can this be dropped?


Nits:

Section 7: The draft-ietf-suit-manifest document uses "Vendor ID/Class ID".
For compatibility, I suggest changing "vendor ID & class ID" to match.

[secdir] draft-ietf-suit-report-15 telechat Secdi… Russ Housley via Datatracker