Last Call Review of draft-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy-10
review-ietf-anima-constrained-join-proxy-10-artart-lc-salz-2022-05-18-00

A block diagram that show the participants and the protocols (like DTLS or
RFC4944, etc) would be very helpful to someone new to this field.  Like me.

Sec 1.
"Once a Pledge is enrolled, it can act as constrained Join Proxy between other
Pledges and the enrolling Registrar."  Is that a special function of JP-based
enrollment, or could anyone in the mesh be a JP? The 1,2 item list has a
spurious "that" in the second entry. The "Similar to..." part in the last
paragraph is a sentence fragment.

Sec 4.
Oh, you have a diagram here.  Spread out the distance between R and J so that
"multi-hop" fits on one line maybe. Consider adding to it and moving it to Sec
1.  Or at least in Sec 1 have a forward pointer. Repeating "(P)" and "(J)"
after the first instance is distracting. Type "untill" in last paragraph. Why
is "legal" in quotes? "An enrolled device can..." same question as above: ANY
enrolled device could?

Sec 5.1
Maybe "such as by" instead of "for example" The parenthetical about "Discovery
can also" and the sentence about DNS-SD probably belong in section 6.  In
Figure 2, I was briefly confused by the label "Src_IP" and the content having
"IP_p" etc.

Sec 5.2
The phrase "but may also reduce" maybe "and may also reduce"? Is are paragraphs
2 and 3 redundant?  Why use JPY and not, say, SJP?  "The registrar should not
assume..."  KEY POINT.

Sec 5.3
Why does the text say "ifindex" but the Figure 4 CDDL says "index"? Since there
can be more than five elements, what is the meaning of extra elements? Ignore
them? Maybe MUST send only five? "Completely opaque to the receiver" really
means the receiving Registrar, right?

Sec 6
I was confused about "near" and "remote"  Maybe "near and far" or "local and
remote" ? The rest of Sec 6, describing the different discovery methods seems
reasonable.  (I am not well-qualified to say more than that)

Sec 7
This could be moved into 5 as a new subsection. If not, sec 5 should have a
forward pointer to the comparison.

Sec 8
I like the list of possibilities for evil, and why they're not new. The "enroll
itself" item should have the last two sentence fragments merged "With ..., the
chance ..."  Next item "Also this is assumed" maybe "This, too, is assumed"  I
think you could bundle all of the items which require having the private key,
for example, and point out that you depend on the security of DTLS to prevent
these things, rather than say "unlikely"