Subject: [Ace] Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-17: (with COMMENT)

From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 21:46:20 -0700

Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-17: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried, but failed, to come up with a reason to DISCUSS this document just to
troll my new co-AD.

As in one of the other ACE documents, the variable use of apostrophes and
quotes created mental dissonance.  Here, though, it's not just in the JSON-like
examples, but even in the prose.  It's consistent until about Section 4, and
then it begins to change.  The second-last paragraph of Section 4.2 even uses
both.

Within Section 1.1, the text describes the draft variably as "this document",
"this specification", "the document", and "this memo".  That's weird.  And
"memo" appears again in Acknowledgements.

In Section 6, you might want to clarify that the context is discarded when any
of the things in that list occur.  Or is it only when all of them occur?

In Section 7, is "provisionings" a word?  Perhaps change "considerably more
token provisionings than expected" to "considerably more tokens provisioned
than would be expected".