Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ace-aif-06: 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-ace-aif/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Section 5.2. The registration policy is Specification required [RFC8126]. The designated expert will engage with the submitter to ascertain the requirements of this document are addressed. To help the DE, is there a way to be clearer on what requirements need to be satisfied? Is it the bulleted list in the SecCons? Section 4? ** Section 6. I was under the impression that AIF didn’t have an explicit requirement to use CoAP. For example, draft-ietf-ace-mqtt-tls-profile appears to use the information model but isn’t restricted to CoAP. Therefore, is it more accurate to say: OLD The security considerations of [RFC7252] apply NEW When AIF is used with CoAP, the security considerations of [RFC7252] apply. _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list Ace@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
