Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teep-architecture-16
review-ietf-teep-architecture-16-genart-lc-kyzivat-2022-04-04-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teep-architecture
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 19)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2022-04-07
Requested 2022-03-17
Authors Mingliang Pei , Hannes Tschofenig , Dave Thaler , Dave Wheeler
I-D last updated 2022-04-04
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -16 by Benjamin M. Schwartz (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -16 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -16 by Paul Kyzivat (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -18 by Bob Halley (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -18 by Ines Robles (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Paul Kyzivat
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-teep-architecture by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/_PQLgwbAxaVsfWgfg62QZHYYlYs
Reviewed revision 16 (document currently at 19)
Result Ready w/issues
Completed 2022-04-04
review-ietf-teep-architecture-16-genart-lc-kyzivat-2022-04-04-00
  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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-teep-architecture-16
Reviewer: Paul Kyzivat
Review Date: 2022-04-??
IETF LC End Date: 2022-04-07
IESG Telechat date: ?

Summary:

This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the 
review.

Issues:

Major: 0
Minor: 2
Nits:  3

1) MINOR: Section 4.5, Fig 3

I find this figure confusing. It starts out looking like a sequence 
diagram, where time flows from top to bottom. But then overlayed on it 
is a nested text outline that seems to interact with the sequence 
diagram. Based on the outline numbering I expect the time sequence to be 
2a,2b,3,4. but based on positioning within the sequence diagram it seems 
that the order should be 2a,3,2b,4. I don't understand how this is 
intended to be read.

2) MINOR: Section 6.2.1:

Is any persistent state assumed in this API or is it stateless? If state 
is assumed, I would like to see the state model described.

3) NIT: Section 1: NIT

    TEEs use hardware enforcement combined with software protection to
    secure TAs and its data.

s/its/their/

4) NIT: Section 2: Device User:...

The last sentence is a fragment. Needs to be reworded.

5) NIT: IdNits

IdNits reports a couple of outdated references that need updating.