Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk-05
review-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk-05-genart-lc-sparks-2019-07-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-08-06
Requested 2019-07-16
Draft last updated 2019-07-30
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -06 by Robert Sparks
Assignment Reviewer Robert Sparks
State Completed
Review review-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk-05-genart-lc-sparks-2019-07-30
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/J-UONIjnmQe_kSWJRMe-bvXlFgo
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 06)
Review result Ready with Issues
Review completed: 2019-07-30

Review
review-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk-05-genart-lc-sparks-2019-07-30

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

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-lamps-cms-mix-with-psk-05
Reviewer: Robert Sparks
Review Date: 2019-07-30
IETF LC End Date: 2019-08-06
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: Essentially ready for publication as a Proposed Standard, but with an
issue to address before publication.

Issue: The instructions for IANA are unclear. IANA has to infer what to add to
the registries. I think they _can_ infer what to do for the IANA-MOD registry.
It's harder (though still possible) to guess what to do for IANA-SMIME. They
also have to infer the structure of the new registry this document intends to
create. Explicit would be better. Also, the document anticipates the currently
non-existing anchor to the new registry in the references (security-smime-13).
That generally should also be a tbd to be filled by IANA when the anchor is 
actually created.

Nits/editorial comments:

Section 5, 1st paragraph, last sentence: "make use fo" should be "makes use of"

Section 9, 1st sentence : "in the Section 5" should be "in Section 6". (That's two changes - the removal of a word, and a correction to the section number).

Micronit: In the introduction, you say "can be invulnerable to an attacker".
"invulnerable" is maybe stronger than you mean?