Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis-01
review-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis-01-genart-lc-dunbar-2024-08-09-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 02)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2024-08-13
Requested 2024-07-30
Authors Russ Housley
I-D last updated 2024-08-09
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -01 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -01 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/tVg15UZ8hWkNnzh-qB4KlLJ-Mg8
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 02)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2024-08-09
review-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis-01-genart-lc-dunbar-2024-08-09-00
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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc8708bis-??
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review Date: 2024-08-09
IETF LC End Date: 2024-08-13
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The document discusses the motivation for using HSS/LMS, which is its
post-quantum security, and highlights the changes made since the previous
version (RFC 8708).

Major issues: None.

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

Section 1.4 describes the change regarding the KEY field in the
pk-HSS-LMS-HashSig definition to reflect "no ASN.1 wrapping for the public
key". I am not an expert in this domain, but would like to know what are the
reasons behind removing the ASN.1 wrapping? Does RFC8708 imply ASN.1 wrapping?

Thank you,
Linda Dunbar