Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-cose-countersign-09: 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-cose-countersign/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Éric Vyncke, INT AD, comments for draft-ietf-cose-countersign-09 CC @evyncke Thank you, Russ, for finishing the work put into this document. Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points , and some nits. Special thanks to Michael Richardson for the shepherd's detailed write-up including the WG consensus even if there is no justification of the intended status. I hope that this review helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric ## COMMENTS ### Abstract and/or introduction A concise definition of countersignature (e.g., from section 3) would make the document more readable. ### Section 1 ``` With the publication of this document, implementers are encouraged to migrate used of the previous countersignature algorithm to the one specified in this document. ``` Is it "used" or "uses" ? ### STD94 The reference in 4 should be to STD94 rather than RFC8949 (or change the anchor in the references). ### Section 3.2 `The attribute is defined below.` perhaps adding a reference (even if just to confirm that it is section 3.3) ? ### Section 3.3 `external_aad` adding an expansion for "aad" will probably help the reader. ### IANA considerations `The majority of the actions are to update the references to point to this document.`, suggest to add a sub-section for this part and be specific about the registry. ## NITS ### Section 1.2 ``` CBOR grammar in this document is uses the CBOR Data Definition Language (CDDL) [RFC8610]. ``` "is" should probably be removed ## Notes This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the [`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into individual GitHub issues. [ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md [ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
