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" <nore...@ietf.org>
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!
_______________________________________________
Ace mailing list
Ace@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
