Last Call Review of draft-ietf-lsr-labv-registration-01
review-ietf-lsr-labv-registration-01-secdir-lc-lonvick-2024-06-19-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-lsr-labv-registration |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 03) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
Deadline | 2024-06-24 | |
Requested | 2024-06-10 | |
Authors | Tony Li | |
I-D last updated | 2024-06-19 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Last Call review of -01
by Andrew Alston
(diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -01 by Susan Hares (diff) Genart Last Call review of -01 by Ines Robles (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -01 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Chris M. Lonvick |
State | Completed | |
Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-lsr-labv-registration by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/BIcSHOO_B9Xn_xBYlVphjWXH6OU | |
Reviewed revision | 01 (document currently at 03) | |
Result | Ready | |
Completed | 2024-06-19 |
review-ietf-lsr-labv-registration-01-secdir-lc-lonvick-2024-06-19-00
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. The summary of the review is READY. As is stated in the draft, "This document changes the registration procedure for that registry from "Standards Action" to "Expert Review"." and the Security Considerations section states, "This document does not affect the security issues discussed in RFC 5029." I agree with the latter and the former seems appropriate. I found no nits in the document. Best regards, Chris