Last Call Review of draft-ietf-uta-xmpp-05
review-ietf-uta-xmpp-05-genart-lc-even-2015-04-03-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-uta-xmpp
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2015-04-13
Requested 2015-03-30
Other Reviews Genart Telechat review of -06 by Roni Even (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Hannes Tschofenig (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -05 by Jürgen Schönwälder (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Roni Even
Review review-ietf-uta-xmpp-05-genart-lc-even-2015-04-03
Posted at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/msg11522.html
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 07)
Review result Not Ready
Draft last updated 2015-04-03
Review completed: 2015-04-03

Review
review-ietf-uta-xmpp-05-genart-lc-even-2015-04-03

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document:  

draft-ietf-uta-xmpp-05

Reviewer: Roni Even

Review Date:2015–4-3

IETF LC End Date: 2015–4-13

IESG Telechat date: 

 

Summary: This draft is not ready for publication as an Standard Track  RFC

.

 

 

Major issues:

I am wondering why this document is a standard track and not Informational, reading it I get the impression that it repeats text from RFC6120 and does not provide new normative information.

 

Section 3.1 talks about TLS support and say that it SHOULD be tried  but since it is a SHOULD I assume that failure may happen and non TLS connections may be used ( I am not sure what RFC6120 say about it.

 

Section 3.4 may look like authentication is a MUST but section 3.5 talks about  unauthenticated connections

 

On section 3.7 I assume that providing e2e information is based on the XMPP architecture that may have only one server to server hop.  Are there other cases?

 

Minor issues: