Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09

Request Review of draft-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 11)
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
Draft last updated 2020-11-25
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -09 by Adam Montville (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -09 by Mohit Sethi (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -09 by Nagendra Nainar (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Mohit Sethi 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-tls-oldversions-deprecate-09-genart-lc-sethi-2020-11-25
Posted at
Reviewed rev. 09 (document currently at 11)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2020-11-25


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


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.