Hi, I've done a top-to-bottom review of draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm. While I'm an author on the document, I haven't kept up on every change as Steffen and Thomas have taken lead.
I should remind people that git hates trailing whitespace, and please configure your editors to remove. I use emacs, and I have some code I use, but most editors now have an option. So some diffs you may see are just trailing space removal, which I guess I could have done on main/master. I made a whole bunch of small editorial fixes, which I collected at: https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/pull/76 (I didn't make all those changes on the 18th, there was a rebase in the middle) You may find that the rich diff at: https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/pull/76/files?short_path=39089b2#diff-39089b29400b74ce53b0f9b46cc0e8c08434b3518372da2bb356646768a1d56e provides for easier review. In many cases I just split up long paragraphs into more digestable parts. ** If it would help discussion for me to split these up into a bunch of separate ** pull requests, I can do that. I tweaked many of the diagrams so that aasvg would produce beautiful HTML/PDF. I also opened the following issues: https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/75: misuse of mDNS https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/74: what is the threat for registrar-agent mis-use https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/73: pledge-status responses are cumullative right? https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/72: section 5.5 is foreshadowed/repeated https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/71: more tweaks need for ts diagram https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/70:why is certificate optional in section 5.5? two trivial questions I want to bring up here. https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/67: shorten the pledge end points in constrained-voucher, we wind up shortening all the end-points, so I wonder if we shouldn't just shorten the ones used in PRM *now* so that they can work with CoAP over BTLE, when we get to that stage? https://github.com/anima-wg/anima-brski-prm/issues/66: reference to registrar as LDevID(Reg) The Registrar certificate is referred to as LDevID(Reg), and I'm not entirely sure why. Yes, it could and probably should be issued by the Enterprise CA, but I don't think it has to be. It's just the Registrar Certificate. It actually should have the cmcRA EKU set, so it's not just an ordinary LDevID. Am I missing something here? Hope to talk to you all on Tuesday evening. -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
