Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09
review-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09-genart-lc-sethi-2020-11-25-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 12) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2020-11-30 | |
| Requested | 2020-11-09 | |
| Authors | Kathleen Moriarty , Stephen Farrell | |
| I-D last updated | 2020-11-25 | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir Last Call review of -09
by Adam W. Montville
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -09 by Mohit Sethi (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Nagendra Kumar Nainar (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Mohit Sethi |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/I-SxnKUXT0xs2R9tCJKO6BjChOA | |
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 12) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2020-11-25 |
review-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09-genart-lc-sethi-2020-11-25-00
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-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09 Reviewer: Mohit Sethi Review Date: 2020-11-25 IETF LC End Date: 2020-11-30 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This document deprecates older versions of TLS and DTLS. It also updates many RFCs that normatively refer to the older TLS/DTLS versions. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: In section 1.1, typo in "waas defined to detect". Most references to RFCs are of the form "[RFC7507]". Can we change "RFC 7457 [RFC7457]" to "[RFC7457]" for uniformity. Similarly, perhaps you could change "RFC5246 [RFC5246]" and "RFC4346 [RFC4346]" to "[RFC5246]" and "[RFC4346]". In section 2 "NIST for example have provided " should be "..has provided...". In section 6 "this document is called out specifically to update text implementing the deprecation recommendations of this document." I was initially confused with the repeated usage of "this". Perhaps it would help to be more explicit.