Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra-28: 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-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for addressing my DISCUSS points. Original COMMENT below. ------ I think this document would benefit from two concise lists, with notes about which items in each list are defined in this document and which ones are not defined: (1) what is operationally required of a manufacturer to support BRSKI, and (2) what is operationally required of a domain owner to support BRSKI. = Section 2.3.1 = What precisely is meant by "TPM identification"? Could a citation be provided? = Section 10.1 = "The domain can maintain some privacy since it has not necessarily been authenticated and is not authoritatively bound to the supply chain." What does this mean? That the domain can expect the manufacturer not to trust the domainID because it hasn't been authenticated? = Section 10.2 = "The above situation is to be distinguished from a residential/ individual person who registers a device from a manufacturer: that an enterprise/ISP purchases routing products is hardly worth mentioning. Deviations would, however, be notable." What does the last sentence mean? _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
