Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-05
review-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-05-genart-lc-halpern-2024-12-27-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2025-01-13
Requested 2024-12-23
Authors Rich Salz , Nimrod Aviram
I-D last updated 2024-12-27
Completed reviews Tsvart Last Call review of -05 by Yoshifumi Nishida
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Joel M. Halpern
Assignment Reviewer Joel M. Halpern
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/dQv1AD3QzzIXVOQK_cv6cp3g2_4
Reviewed revision 05
Result Ready w/issues
Completed 2024-12-27
review-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-05-genart-lc-halpern-2024-12-27-00
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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-tls-tls12-frozen-05
Reviewer: Joel Halpern
Review Date: 2024-12-27
IETF LC End Date: 2025-01-13
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This document is ready for publication as an Informational RFC.  It is
short, clear, and even to my uninformed eye appears an appropriate step.  I do
have one question on which reasonable people can and will differ, noted under
minor issues.

Major issues: N/A

Minor issues:
    Given that this document, once published as an RFC, places normative
    restrictions on IETF work, it seems odd to list it as "Informational"? 
    Wouldn't BCP be a better status for it?

Nits/editorial comments: