Last Call Review of draft-ietf-acme-subdomains-04
review-ietf-acme-subdomains-04-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-11-20-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-acme-subdomains
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2022-11-21
Requested 2022-10-31
Authors Owen Friel , Richard Barnes , Tim Hollebeek , Michael Richardson
I-D last updated 2022-11-20
Completed reviews Artart Last Call review of -04 by Carsten Bormann (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Reese Enghardt (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Bo Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Bo Wu
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-acme-subdomains by Ops Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ops-dir/N30anzTd4AWxlz_a07c0_1RtuaU
Reviewed revision 04 (document currently at 07)
Result Has nits
Completed 2022-11-20
review-ietf-acme-subdomains-04-opsdir-lc-wu-2022-11-20-00
Reviewer: Bo Wu
Review result: Has Nits

I am the assigned Ops reviewer for this draft.

Document: draft-ietf-acme-subdomains-04

Summary:

This document (with intended status Standards Track) extends ACME [RFC8555] to
support issuing certificates for subdomains. This is a well-written document.

Major issues: None.

Minor issues: None.

Nits/editorial comments:

1- Question: Section 4.3, Would it better to replace "a given identifier FQDN"
with "a given subdomain"?
   Clients need a mechanism to optionally indicate to servers whether or
   not they are authorized to fulfill challenges against parent domains
   for a given identifier FQDN.

2- Question: Section 5, it seems that the text below the call flow figure is
not consistent with the figure. It would be better to describe the differences
between the steps in the figure and the steps in the text below.

3- Inconsistent words: Section 5, pre-authorised -> pre-authorized

4- Question: Section 8, Is RFC 8555 a normal reference as this document is an
enhancement to this RFC?

Thanks,
Bo Wu