Last Call Review of draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility-05

Request Review of draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-02-17
Requested 2019-02-03
Authors Love Astrand, Larry Zhu, Margaret Cullen, Margaret Cullen, Greg Hudson
Draft last updated 2019-03-01
Completed reviews Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Scott Bradner (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Takeshi Takahashi (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -06 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg
State Completed
Review review-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility-05-genart-lc-holmberg-2019-03-01
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 08)
Review result Ready with Issues
Review completed: 2019-03-01


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


Document: draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility-05
Reviewer: Christer Holmberg
Review Date: 2019-03-01
IETF LC End Date: 2019-02-17
IESG Telechat date: 2019-03-07

Summary: The draft needs to be more clear on how RFC 4556 is updated.

Major issues: None

Minor issues:


For the unfamiliar reader, it is unclear exactly how RFC 4556 is updated. There is e.g., no text indicating what sections of 4556 are updated, and there is no "Updates to RFC 4556" section.

I assume the remainder of the draft then updates RFC 4556, but I think it needs to be more clear for the unfamiliar reader.

Even if a "Updates to RFC 4556" section would not be feasible, the document should indicate what parts/sections of 4556 are updated, and what sections in the draft defines those updates.

Nits/editorial comments:


Both the Abstract and the Introduction start with "This document updates PKINIT,..."

I think it would be good to first give some background information on the issue(s), and then state that the document fixes those issues by updating RFC 4556.