I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-tls-cached-info-20 Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen Review Date: 2015-11-29 IETF LC End Date: 2015-12-04 IESG Telechat date: 2015-12-17 Summary: -------- Ready for publication with some nits. Comments: --------- The document was good read and easy to understand. Minor issues/nits: ------------------ * IDnits spits out some warning & comments that all seem to be bogus. However, the normative reference to RFC 4634 needs to be replaced with RFC 6234. * The document describes in few places how the mechanisms specified extends/updates the Certificate and CertificateRequest structures. So maybe the draft should also state that in its boilerplate “Updates: 5246, 7250” ? * Line 99: s/its’/its * Line 164: s/data\.\./data\. * Section 5 talks about “input data” for the hash & fingerprint calculation. What the “input data” exactly is becomes obvious after reading the Appendix A. However, for non-TLS WG activist it was not obvious from the first sight. Suggest adding a forward reference to Appendix A example. * Section 6 uses [0], [1], .. [4]. While these are perfectly correct they can be mixed with references in the first sight -> few seconds of confusion ;) I would suggest using (0), .. (4). * The document uses referencing all styles “RFC 7250 [RFC7250]”, “RFC 7250” and “[RFC7250]”. Pick one. * It is unclear to me what happens & what are the procedures when two different “input data”s generate the same fingerprint. _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
