Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-05

From: Ines Robles <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 04:28:16 -0700

Reviewer: Ines Robles
Review result: Ready with Issues

Hello,

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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-05
Reviewer: Ines Robles
Review Date: 27-04-2018
IETF LC End Date:  27-04-2018
IESG Telechat date: ---

Summary:

I believe the draft is technically good. This document is well written and
clear to understand. Some minor concerns are mentioned that should be resolved
before publication.

Major issues: No major issues found.

Minor issues:

Section 1.6:

    It would be nice to start the section with some text like "This document
    obsoletes 5750 due to the addition of the following information...."

Section 2.3:

    "but SHOULD use some other mechanism to determine ...." => It would be nice
    to mention some examples of the other mechanism

    "...but SHOULD use some other mechanism (such as ....) to determine..."

Section 4:

    Related to this:
    "Another method under consideration by the IETF is to provide certificate
    retrieval services as part of the existing Domain Name System (DNS)"

    - This text seems to be out of the date (since belongs as well to RFC5750
    (2010)), maybe it would be nice to re-write it (e.g. method under
    consideration => method approved) and add a reference of the proposed
    methods. Would it be RFC 8162 [1] a good reference for this topic?

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8162:  Using Secure DNS to Associate
Certificates with Domain Names for S/MIME

Nits/editorial comments:

Section 2.3: CertificateSet --> Certificate Set

Section 4.4.1: basicConstraints --> basic Constraints

Thanks for this document!

Ines.

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:45:09 -0400

These are references to ASN.1 definitions, so they should not be changed as indicated.

Russ

> On Apr 27, 2018, at 7:28 AM, Ines Robles <[email-masked]> wrote:
>