Re: [TLS] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-04

[Sean Turner <[e-mail]>]

> On Feb 20, 2018, at 14:50, Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates-05
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> Review Date: 2018-02-20
> IETF LC End Date: 2018-03-01
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-03-08
> 
> Summary: A well written document that is difficult to check and easy to make a
> mistake with. There are a tiny number of editorial matters. The matter of the
> semantics of Recommended = no may need to further thought and clarification.
> 
> Major issues: None
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> I think convention is to list the documents being updated in the Abstract, but
> cannot find any formal guidance.

You’re right that is the convention, but it’s not required.  draft-flanagan-7322bis is attempting to make including updates in the abstract a must, but it’s not been through any kind of LC yet.  There is a sentence there saying that a lot of RFCs are updated and to see the updates header so I think under the 7322 to balance concise and to not include references I’m thinking this is okay.

> ======
> 
>  If an item is marked as not recommended it does not necessarily mean
> SB> Do you mean "marked as not recommended" or "not marked as recommended”.

There are two states for the Recommended column: YES and NO.  I can go either way on whether
marked as not recommended = NO
not marked as recommended = NO

WG - thoughts?

> =======
> SB>  I am worried about the semantics of Recommended = no.
> SB> Presumably there are three states: recommended, not recommended,
> SB> and silent/don't know/don't care/not yet. Which of these
> SB> states does Recommended = no represent?

There are two states and a draft that specifies a value in a registry that has a Recommended column needs to state which it is.  I’m not too concerned because we can change the column value later if it turns out a NO should have been a YES.

> Nits/editorial comments:
> Abstract
> 
>   This document describes a number of changes to (D)TLS IANA registries
> 
> SB> TLS is not a well known abbreviation and so needs expanding

Right well I should fix that ;)

I made the following tweak:

OLD:

  (D)TLS

NEW

  Transport Layer Security and Datagram Transport Layer Security ((D)TLS)

PR:
https://github.com/tlswg/draft-ietf-tls-iana-registry-updates/pull/63

> ========
> 
>   This document instructs IANA to make changes to a number of (D)TLS-
> 
> SB> TLS needs expanding

See above.

spt