Re: [TLS] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-guidance-03

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

Hi! I have created an issue to track this review:
https://github.com/tlswg/external-psk-design-team/issues/79

Cheers,
spt

> On Nov 15, 2021, at 14:05, Scott Bradner via Datatracker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Scott Bradner
> Review result: Has Nits
> 
> This is an OPS-DIR review of Guidance for External PSK Usage in TLS
> <draft-ietf-tls-external-psk-guidance>.
> 
> As its title indicates, this ID provides guidance for the use of pre-shared
> keys with TLS. Guidance documents are inherently useful to operations community
> and this is no exception.
> 
> I found the document well written, slightly repetitive as Rich noted, but not
> so much so as for it to be an issue for me.
> 
> A few notes though.
> 
> in section 4.2 the term PAKE is used without any definition – there is a
> reference to a document but it seems to be that at least expanding the term in
> this document would be useful.
> 
> the document uses the term SHOULD in a number of places.  (e.g. multiple places
> in section 7 and one in section 8) – for what its worth – I am not a fan of the
> use of this term unless the text also says when not doing what the SHOULD says
> to do is OK – i.e. since SHOULD is a MUST with an escape clause – I think it is
> useful to actually say what the escape clause is – i.e. explain why this is not
> a MUST.  (also it does seem a bit funky to say (as section 7 does) “MUST
> adhere” to requirements which are SHOULDs )
> 
> 
>