Last Call Review of draft-ietf-emu-eaptlscert-06
review-ietf-emu-eaptlscert-06-secdir-lc-santesson-2020-10-29-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-emu-eaptlscert
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2020-10-28
Requested 2020-10-14
Authors Mohit Sethi , John Preuß Mattsson , Sean Turner
I-D last updated 2020-10-29
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Stefan Santesson (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Stefan Santesson
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-emu-eaptlscert by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/RORLtuSIIoD9c6XOu4f2jtiLejM
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 08)
Result Has nits
Completed 2020-10-29
review-ietf-emu-eaptlscert-06-secdir-lc-santesson-2020-10-29-00
The document in general is good and well written.

Some nits needs attention before publication as the general review also points
out. Ex in the abstract "This document looks at the this problem"

Some abbreviations needs to be spelled out at first usage, such as MTU (Maximum
Transmission Unit)

On the content itself I have two questions:

- Wouldn't it be relevant to also discuss the risks with regard to introduction
of quantum safe crypto, if that leads to significantly increased key sizes? It
could be troublesome if transition to a safer crypto is made impossible due to
size limitations. - Would it be relevant to discuss usage of AIA extension as
means of possibly excluding intermediary certs from the path as they could be
located using AIA?

Finally, I agree with the general review that this document reference quite
some work in progress. If this document is to be published before these
referenced works are concluded, are there alternatives to make the same point?