Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-cose-dilithium-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-dilithium/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you to Russ Housley for the GENART review. ** Editorial. A number of references in the document are not formal references. For example: -- Section 4, “FIPS 204” vs. “[FIPS 204]” (multiple instances) -- Section 8.1.1, “RFC 9053 and RFC 9054” vs. “[RFC9053] and [RFC9054]” (multiple instances) ** Section 8.1.1.* -- Why is the change control entity specific named here, but it is in the JOSE registrations? ** Section 8.1.4.4.* -- These registration have a row with “Value registry: [IANA.jose] Algorithms”. That is not in the RFC7518 template or in the production https://www.iana.org/assignments/jose/jose.xhtml#web-signature-encryption-algorithms registry _______________________________________________ COSE mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
