Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-add-svcb-dns-06
review-ietf-add-svcb-dns-06-genart-lc-yee-2022-07-08-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-add-svcb-dns
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2022-07-08
Requested 2022-06-24
Authors Benjamin M. Schwartz
Draft last updated 2022-07-08
Completed reviews Intdir Last Call review of -06 by Carlos J. Bernardos (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -06 by Martin J. Dürst (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Peter E. Yee (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Joseph A. Salowey (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Peter E. Yee
State Completed
Review review-ietf-add-svcb-dns-06-genart-lc-yee-2022-07-08
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/T4D0gKTp6m_TFw0C26Ib-7PqttY
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 07)
Result Ready with Nits
Completed 2022-07-08
review-ietf-add-svcb-dns-06-genart-lc-yee-2022-07-08-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-add-svcb-dns-06
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review Date: 2022-07-08
IETF LC End Date: 2022-07-08
IESG Telechat date: 2022-07-14

Summary: This document specifies how SVCB can be used for named DNS servers,
including ones that use any of DoH, DoT, and DoQ. There are nits that should be
fixed prior to publication. I really have no complaints about this document and
am not repeating any points that have been made in prior reviews. [Ready with
Nits]

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:

General:

Perhaps change the two occurrences of "a SVCB" to "an SVCB" on the assumption
that "SVCB" is read as ess-vee-cee-bee.

Specific:

Page 5, 1st bullet item, insert "to" between "trusts" and "not". Or place the
"to" after "not".