Last Call Review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud-13
review-ietf-opsawg-mud-13-secdir-lc-montville-2017-10-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-opsawg-mud
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 20)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2017-11-07
Requested 2017-10-24
Other Reviews Secdir Early review of -08 by Adam Montville (diff)
Genart Early review of -08 by Robert Sparks (diff)
Iotdir Early review of -08 by Henk Birkholz (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -08 by Martin Bjorklund (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -13 by Adrian Farrel (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -20 by Robert Sparks
Opsdir Telechat review of -20 by Scott Bradner
Review State Completed
Reviewer Adam Montville
Review review-ietf-opsawg-mud-13-secdir-lc-montville-2017-10-28
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Rny4PkmoxHQknG08lbq5i1sjncQ
Reviewed rev. 13 (document currently at 20)
Review result Ready
Draft last updated 2017-10-28
Review completed: 2017-10-28

Review
review-ietf-opsawg-mud-13-secdir-lc-montville-2017-10-28

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 draft is ready. 

All previously identified potential issues (see [1]) seem to have been addressed. For the security ADs, please review the summary I wrote at [1], which is still applicable.

For the opsawg folks, if (when?) you get around to describing how software packages might be able to convey their intended use and/or preferred configuration, let me know - I'd like to help.

[1] https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg07563.html