Last Call Review of draft-ietf-core-dev-urn-08
review-ietf-core-dev-urn-08-genart-lc-holmberg-2020-11-22-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-core-dev-urn
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2020-12-02
Requested 2020-11-18
Authors Jari Arkko , Cullen Fluffy Jennings , Zach Shelby
I-D last updated 2020-11-22
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Brian Weis (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -08 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -08 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -09 by Dave Thaler (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -09 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -09 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-core-dev-urn by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/rdjJT3J0G-NjHJz_Txj5PpCgvtk
Reviewed revision 08 (document currently at 11)
Result Ready w/issues
Completed 2020-11-22
review-ietf-core-dev-urn-08-genart-lc-holmberg-2020-11-22-00
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-core-dev-urn-08
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2020-11-22
IETF LC End Date: 2020-12-02
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:

The document is well written, and easy to read, and I don't have any technical
issues.

However, I do have some questions (one that I consider major, the rest
minor/editorial) which I think needs clarifications:

Major issues:

Q1_MA:

Section 6.1. says:

"The URNs generated according to the rules defined in this document
result in long-term stable unique identifiers for the devices."

- What are those rules?

In Section 3.3 I do see the following statement:

"The DEV URN type SHOULD only be used for persistent identifiers, such
as hardware-based identifiers or cryptographic identifiers based on
keys intended for long-term usage."

Is that what you refer to as rules? Or, have I missed something?

Also, to me the statement seems like an important applicability statement for
DEV URNs. If so, should there be a separate Applicability (or similar) section
earlier in the document, which points it out?

Minor issues:

Q2_MI:

Section 3.1. says:

"The DEV URNs identify devices with device-specific identifiers such as network
card hardware addresses."

- Can there be multiple DEV URNs associated with a single device?

Q3_MI:

Section 3.1. says:

"DEV URN is global in scope."

- What does that actually mean?

Nits/editorial comments:

Q4_ED:

In the Introduction, SenML and RD are given as examples where the URN may be
useful. It would be nice to exactly see some usage examples of the URN. Section
5 only contains examples of the URN itself.