IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Wish] [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-wish-whip-13

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Mon, 18 March 2024 20:47 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: wish@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wish@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12107C1D5C5B; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=vigilsec.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jjuH5PgKHqbg; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail3.g24.pair.com (mail3.g24.pair.com [66.39.134.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 065CFC14F696; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 13:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail3.g24.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.g24.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E519715022D; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 16:47:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (pfs.iad.rg.net [198.180.150.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail3.g24.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5698F1508F7; Mon, 18 Mar 2024 16:47:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <6EF40BE5-B231-493D-9A48-971F74D8C047@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_44625455-54DD-4819-9E40-1E421C0F7CB1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6\))
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 16:47:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CA+ag07bq6V40sq+uv+6DTj_d88G9Biovh3BDD7ONu66uQZdiaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IETF SecDir <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-wish-whip.all@ietf.org, Last Call <last-call@ietf.org>, wish@ietf.org
To: Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
References: <171046071273.19170.9115939465212766474@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+ag07bq6V40sq+uv+6DTj_d88G9Biovh3BDD7ONu66uQZdiaQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=vigilsec.com; h=from:message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to:references; s=pair-202402141609; bh=/2Pj06MMd7oWGetpYAkKdkXbc2jithfl8+4impR0Or8=; b=GN5KQhmQsD4hMsvRwI1xYYmJILGQohdpfKy32eLDmxxLUdBc9M2MrXauR6HGBb5R0h0gkoLfJO0zrrBwjYaihJthIl6LLx4kALRLgpu83oGGIUn1N3lWPloN4Ba0vk2GAcT26EvVkvIQAVl0JRW3/K+oTyWirqVmaTvrs08AJYRyVDzKRDjAXIMx3teGOJvoPaSv7wL/mMMapLsJISc33LThuf2qzlCij39bvMBEMTBnLWqcS2tSgOf+n1ZuolYE22h8H+6EClPqDCUqVB7hcYvuAvHX8RBIPmvlXcebuM5JWxOWtJAlGFfXIxTNcUxs+Ox9YMiOmC6RigGcjjTkdA==
X-Scanned-By: mailmunge 3.11 on 66.39.134.11
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wish/LvxDwVAQu0H5uZd0cJVlKI6KJhU>
Subject: Re: [Wish] [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-wish-whip-13
X-BeenThere: wish@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: WebRTC Ingest Signaling over HTTPS <wish.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wish>, <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wish/>
List-Post: <mailto:wish@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wish>, <mailto:wish-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 20:47:32 -0000

Sergio:
> 
>> Minor Concerns:
>> 
>> Figures 2, 3, and 4 are not referenced from body of the document.  It is
>> best to include a reference in the body that offers some description of what
>> the reader is expected to learn from the figure.  When I as a Security AD,
>> the other Security AD was blind.  The text-to-audio system that he used was
>> surprisingly good, but it could not handle ASCII art.  The discussion of
>> the figures was vital to him being able to understand a document.  Please
>> help readers that depend on such tools.
> 
> I was not aware of this, thank you very much for pointing it out, seems something important to be addressed.
> 
> Do you have any guideline or example about how to best make the change so it works properly with screen readers?

I think you need a small amut of text to summarize the figure.  I am unaware of a way to do better that that

Russ

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email