IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-suit-update-management-10
review-ietf-suit-update-management-10-secdir-lc-nystrom-2025-12-22-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-suit-update-management |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 13) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2026-01-02 | |
| Requested | 2025-12-12 | |
| Authors | Brendan Moran , Ken Takayama | |
| I-D last updated | 2026-07-09 (Latest revision 2026-07-03) | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -10
by Magnus Nyström
(diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Roni Even (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -10 by Niclas Comstedt (diff) Artart IETF Last Call review of -10 by Russ Housley (diff) Iotdir Telechat review of -12 by Hannes Tschofenig (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Magnus Nyström |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-suit-update-management by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/G_eh8ari6VvbV6ZzHDHqI2wP3AU | |
| Reviewed revision | 10 (document currently at 13) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2025-12-22 |
review-ietf-suit-update-management-10-secdir-lc-nystrom-2025-12-22-00
I-D covers the potential issues I could think of. A minor point, in 3.3, it is stated "suit-coswid is RECOMMENDED to implement and RECOMMENDED to include in manifests." - why is a similar statement not made for the other extension meta data? Thanks,