Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize-06: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ace-extend-dtls-authorize/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Minor level comments: (1) p 2, sec 4. Connection Establishment Clients and Resource Servers SHOULD support DTLS and MAY support TLS. This seems to make successful interop a bit less likely to me. Perhaps it would be sensible to suggest that Resource Servers SHOULD support both DTLS and TLS? Nit level comments: (2) p 1, sec 1. Introduction UDP might be blocked on the path between the client and the RS, and the Trivial nit (which the RFC editor will fix anyway), you are using RS here in the introduction before it is defined in section 4. (3) p 2, sec 4. Connection Establishment As resource-constrained devices are not expected to support both transport layer security mechanisms. Another nit, this sentence doesn't stand well on its own please drop the "As" or link this sentence with the next. _______________________________________________ Ace mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace
