Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-raw-technologies-10
review-ietf-raw-technologies-10-secdir-lc-sahib-2024-09-19-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-raw-technologies
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 17)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2024-09-18
Requested 2024-09-04
Authors Pascal Thubert , Dave Cavalcanti , Xavier Vilajosana , Corinna Schmitt , János Farkas
I-D last updated 2026-04-15 (Latest revision 2025-04-15)
Completed reviews Intdir Telechat review of -15 by Ron Bonica (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -06 by Victoria Pritchard (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -10 by Shivan Kaul Sahib (diff)
Artart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Jiankang Yao (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Mallory Knodel (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -15 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -10 by Mohamed Boucadair (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -13 by Mohamed Boucadair (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -14 by Donald E. Eastlake 3rd (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -14 by Mohamed Boucadair (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Shivan Kaul Sahib
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-raw-technologies by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/eUJX_Nhw9TKljFI0UBYjyZ29Fks
Reviewed revision 10 (document currently at 17)
Result Has issues
Completed 2024-09-19
review-ietf-raw-technologies-10-secdir-lc-sahib-2024-09-19-00
I have reviewed draft-ietf-raw-technologies-10 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 with issues.

The document is an Informational draft that doesn't define any new behaviour
and instead simply provides an overview of reliable and available wireless
technology developments. The current "Security Considerations" section refers
readers to the individual security concerns of each technology. While the
document doesn't introduce any new security considerations, I do think
discussing the broader security considerations with these technologies would be
very useful to the reader of this document and the omission seems surprising. I
will leave it up to the ADs to see if this is something they want to block on.

Apart from that, some minor grammatical and text improvement issues:

1. Introduction
   s/A runtime distributed Path/a runtime distributed Path

2. Section 4.1
   The first paragraph of Section 4.1 reads like promotional material for IEEE,
   which seems unnecessary for an IETF document. Similarly, the descriptions of
   Wi-Fi Alliance and Avnu Alliance in this section also seem promotional.

3. Section 5.2.2.1.2:
   s/etc.../etc.