[lamps] Lars Eggert's No Objection on draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05: (with COMMENT)

[Lars Eggert via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Lars Eggert has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05: 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-lamps-documentsigning-eku/



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

# GEN AD review of draft-ietf-lamps-documentsigning-eku-05

CC @larseggert

Thanks to Dale Worley for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/1T23l8-kN8pEMqnQvh1ir3MsGVw)

## Comments

### Section 4, paragraph 1
```
     The signed contents of Internet-Drafts are primarily intended to be
```
Did you mean "documents" here instead of "Internet-Drafts"?

## Nits

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool) so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

### Typos

#### Section 1, paragraph 3
```
-    owner but by another vendor, the vender who own the KeyPurposeIds may
-                                         ^
-    not able to control use, or even do not know about the use. - If the
-                                                                -
+    owner but by another vendor, the vendor who own the KeyPurposeIds may
+                                         ^
```

#### Section 4, paragraph 5
```
-       party software proresses each restriction on "Excluded
-                         ^
+       party software processes each restriction on "Excluded
+                         ^
```

### Grammar/style

#### Section 4, paragraph 8
```
the format it is handling (e.g. text, pdf, etc). 5. Implications for a Certif
                                      ^^^
```
File types are normally capitalized.

#### Section 4, paragraph 8
```
ormat it is handling (e.g. text, pdf, etc). 5. Implications for a Certificati
                                      ^^^
```
A period is needed after the abbreviation "etc.".

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
[IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool