[Suit] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-suit-information-model-08: (with COMMENT)
Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 03 December 2020 11:54 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: suit@ietf.org
Delivered-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ACE93A0766; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 03:54:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-suit-information-model@ietf.org, suit-chairs@ietf.org, suit@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, dthaler@microsoft.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.23.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <160699645841.7068.8542217062832784146@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 03:54:18 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/suit/PNWH8t3XhJb38WG4_JBxzi6pE1k>
Subject: [Suit] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-suit-information-model-08: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: suit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Software Updates for Internet of Things <suit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/suit/>
List-Post: <mailto:suit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 11:54:19 -0000
Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-suit-information-model-08: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-suit-information-model/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank for your work on this document. Generally I found this document to fairly easy to read, although it did feel somewhat back to front, although this is probably just personal style. I.e., I think that I would have preferred for the security considerations section to describe the threat model and threats, but for all the requirements and user stories to be documented early in the document before the manifest elements are described. Other than the document structure, I also have a question regarding Vendor ID and Class ID. Both of these use UUIDs, but it wasn't really clear to me why UUIDs are better than using a domain and a string. I appreciate that the stated goal is that these don't need to be human readable, but does this mean that it is only the device and device owner who is able to determine whether a particular firmware is compatible with a particular device. Is it not potentially helpful to provide a hint to the user as to whether the firmware described by a manifest might be suitable for a given device, or is that information available in some other way? Regards, Rob
- [Suit] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf… Robert Wilton via Datatracker