Last Call Review of draft-ietf-jsonpath-base-17
review-ietf-jsonpath-base-17-secdir-lc-harkins-2023-08-10-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-jsonpath-base |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 21) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
Deadline | 2023-08-09 | |
Requested | 2023-07-26 | |
Authors | Stefan Gössner , Glyn Normington , Carsten Bormann | |
I-D last updated | 2023-08-10 | |
Completed reviews |
Secdir Last Call review of -17
by Dan Harkins
(diff)
Artart Last Call review of -16 by Darrel Miller (diff) Genart Last Call review of -17 by Linda Dunbar (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -16 by Joe Clarke (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Dan Harkins |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-jsonpath-base by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/mY1I8frNGywQ0dQmsUs6-oyW2M0 | |
Reviewed revision | 17 (document currently at 21) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2023-08-09 |
review-ietf-jsonpath-base-17-secdir-lc-harkins-2023-08-10-00
Hello, I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. I found the draft somewhat hard to read. It seems kind of loose in its terminology. For example, "A node is either the root node or one of its descendants." Its? So a node can be its own descendant? I have to think that should be "...or the descendant of a root node." Also, "member values have nodes, but members and member names do not" but members are a name/value pair so it takes a bit to parse that. A member doesn't have a node but a component of the member does? What? The security considerations were good and they highlight things that an implementer needs to pay attention to, which is important. The descriptive text was, for me, confusing until I got to an example and then the confusing text made sense. Given the fact that this document has gone through 16 revisions I want to believe that the confusion is not shared by others who may be more familiar with the subject matter. So as much as I initially wanted to say the draft has issues (loose and confusing language that is highly contextual) I will just say that it is Ready. regards, Dan. -- "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius