Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03
review-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03-secdir-lc-farrell-2019-11-29-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2019-12-02
Requested 2019-11-18
Authors Tim Wicinski
Draft last updated 2019-11-29
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -03 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Stephen Farrell (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -03 by Brian Trammell (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -04 by Jean-Michel Combes (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Stephen Farrell 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03-secdir-lc-farrell-2019-11-29
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/pLslFU9NxI6sleHu9pOz2rdrvcE
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 08)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2019-11-29

Review
review-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03-secdir-lc-farrell-2019-11-29

I might not be the best reviewer for this one as I've read it a few times
before. But anyway, I scanned the diff [1] with RFC7626 and figure it
seems fine. 

The only thing that occurred to me that seemed missing was to note
that while the new privacy analysis in 3.5.1.1 is already complex, many
systems are mobile and hence an analysis that ignores that won't be 
sufficient. For a mobile device one really needs to analyse all of the 
possible setups, and hence it's even harder to get to a good answer. 
(It could be that that's elsewhere in the document but since I only 
read the diff, I didn't see it:-)

Cheers,
S.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc7626&url2=draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03.txt