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

From: Francesca Palombini <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:44:35 +0000

Hi Murray!

Thank you very much for the review! We have incorporated your changes in the newly submitted v-18 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ace-oscore-profile-18 , but you can also see the specific changes in the github commit: 
https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-oscore-profile/commit/01804050ccd6628bc0ee385e0f9a7a0e31d7513a
https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-oscore-profile/commit/5ed90a19d5e38140f254c13986325f5699ca6835
https://github.com/ace-wg/ace-oscore-profile/commit/fa517050f6f8209cc9f07073e91b761196973b12

Answers inline.

Thanks again,
Francesca

On 25/03/2021, 05:46, "Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker" <[email-masked]> wrote:

    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.

FP: Ah! Very satisfying to hear :D

    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.

FP: Fair comment, we have now removed the use of single quotes.

    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.

FP: Point taken, we now only refer to the draft as "This document"

    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?

FP: Indeed, when any of the things occur. Now clarified.

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

FP: It might be a word, it might not, since in doubt we have now changed to your suggested phrasing. Thank you!