Last Call Review of draft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs-05
review-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs-05-opsdir-lc-wijnen-2015-12-22-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | Ops Directorate (opsdir) | |
| Deadline | 2015-12-15 | |
| Requested | 2015-11-29 | |
| Authors | Alexey Melnikov | |
| I-D last updated | 2017-07-24 (Latest revision 2015-12-29) | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart IETF Last Call review of -05
by Joel M. Halpern
(diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -05 by Adam W. Montville (diff) Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -05 by Bert Wijnen (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Bert Wijnen |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs by Ops Directorate Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 05 (document currently at 09) | |
| Result | Has nits | |
| Completed | 2015-12-22 |
review-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs-05-opsdir-lc-wijnen-2015-12-22-00
Hi I did the OPS-Directorate review fordraft-ietf-uta-email-tls-certs-07
In general, I think this document is more or less ready to be published.
I do believe that section 5 does touch on a number of operational
aspects (and specifically about scaling). The title of that section
however is:
Compliance Checklist for Mail Service Providers and Certificate
Signing Request generation tools
So it may not immediately attract attention from operators so that
they can see operational aspects. Maybe that could be pointed out
somewhere in the document.
Section 5 also states that this document and its predecessors
"don't address scaling issues caused by use of TLS in multi-tenanted
environments." And it states that further work is needed in that space.
That is another operational aspect that may need to be pointed out
specifically to operators.
So maybe these 2 points can be highlighted in a saparate small sectoin
titled "Operational Considerations".
Just thinking aloud here. The point s have been made, but such a small
section qould quickly point operators to the proper places for info.
Nits:
- Page 4:
5. Email protocols allow use of certain wilcards in identifiers
s/wilcards/wildcards/
- page 5, 1st para section 4.1:
email clients would be forced to manual confirm exception, because
s/manual/manually/ ??
Bert