Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-07: 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-tls-tls12-frozen/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-07 CC @evyncke Thank you for the work put into this document. It is short, useful, but may need some adjustments (see below). Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated even if only for my own education). Special thanks to Sean Turner for the shepherd's detailed write-up including the WG consensus *and* the justification of the intended status. I hope that this review helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric ## COMMENTS (non-blocking) ### Section 2 Thanks for prefixing NIST with US in `US National Institute of Standards and Technology` but you forgot to introduce the NIST acronym ;-) Any reason why BCP14-like notation is used in `TLS 1.2 WILL NOT be supported` ? Rather then `supported`, which is outside of the IETF remit, why not using `specified` ? ## Section 4 s/Any TLS entry added after the IESG approves publication of {THIS RFC}/Any TLS entry added after the publication of {THIS RFC}/ ? It is clearer for outsiders at the expense of a small time window between IESG approval and RFC publication. ``` Any registries created after this document is approved for publication should indicate whether the actions defined here are applicable ``` I find the above text really vague and underspecified. Who will decide the applicability ? Should there be guidelines ? _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
