Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-teep-protocol-24
review-ietf-teep-protocol-24-artart-telechat-miller-2026-02-21-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teep-protocol
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 26)
Type Telechat Review
Team ART Area Review Team (artart)
Deadline 2026-02-17
Requested 2026-02-02
Authors Hannes Tschofenig , Mingliang Pei , Dave Wheeler , Dave Thaler , Akira Tsukamoto
I-D last updated 2026-04-30 (Latest revision 2026-02-26)
Completed reviews Artart IETF Last Call review of -21 by Scott Hollenbeck (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -21 by Yoshifumi Nishida (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -21 by Paul Kyzivat (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -21 by Sean Turner (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -21 by Luigi Iannone (diff)
Artart Telechat review of -24 by Darrel Miller (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -23 by Sean Turner (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -23 by Eliot Lear (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Darrel Miller
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-teep-protocol by ART Area Review Team Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/Z60PKWrfJM-ULlUOJHo1KsYgYTY
Reviewed revision 24 (document currently at 26)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2026-02-21
review-ietf-teep-protocol-24-artart-telechat-miller-2026-02-21-00
This is an ART area review.

## NITs

Table 6 in section 13.5 has the following line:

> 2-255 (Reserved for future use)

I suspect that was intended to be 24-255.

13.6 assigns registry values 0 and 1 to the two cipher suites, but the CDDL in
Section 8.1 defines them as arrays of operations ([[18, -19]] and [[18,-9]]),
not as integer values. Are the integer values in the registry used anywhere on
the wire, or are they only for registry identification?

4.6, token field description says: "It MUST match the value of the token
parameter in the message the Success is in response to". This seems like it
should say "Error" instead of "Success."

That's all from me,

Darrel Miller