Last Call Review of draft-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305-04
review-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305-04-genart-lc-miller-2016-12-16-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305 |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 06) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2016-12-16 | |
| Requested | 2016-12-02 | |
| Authors | Russ Housley | |
| I-D last updated | 2016-12-16 | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Last Call review of -04
by Niclas Comstedt
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Matthew A. Miller (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Yoav Nir (diff) Opsdir Telechat review of -05 by Niclas Comstedt (diff) Genart Telechat review of -05 by Matthew A. Miller (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Matthew A. Miller |
| State | Completed Snapshot | |
| Review |
review-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305-04-genart-lc-miller-2016-12-16
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 04 (document currently at 06) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2017-03-06 |
The information below is for an old version of the document.
review-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305-04-genart-lc-miller-2016-12-16-00
[ re-posting to get it onto the mailing list archives; some bugs prevented it the first time ] 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 < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq >. Document: draft-ietf-curdle-cms-chacha20-poly1305-04 Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller Review Date: 2016-12-16 IETF LC End Date: 2016-12-16 IESG Telechat date: N/A Summary: Ready to be published as a Proposed Standards document. Major issues: NONE Minor issues: NONE Nits/editorial comments: NONE Non-issues: Nits is reporting a downref to RFC 7539 (ChaCha20 and Poly1035). However it is standard practice for cryptographic algorithm documents to be Informational rather than Standards Track, therefore I don't think there's a real concern here. Nits is also reporting downrefs for X680 and X690, but I believe these are acceptable as they define ASN.1.