Just saw this didn't get the boilerplate added when posted by the tracker.
Please assume it to be there.

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Reviewer: Phillip Hallam-Baker
> Review result: Has Nits
>
> I have reviewed the document and it is generally free of security
> considerations as claimed. There are some areas of concern however, the
> significance of which may become more apparent as such tools find future
> use.
>
> As described in the document, the tree diagram format is intended to serve
> as
> an output generated by a tool to aid human interpretation. Thus, a
> potential
> ambiguity can arise if the tool used to generate the format is buggy or if
> the
> document contains schema and presentation data compiled from different
> versions
> of the source.
>
> Specifications using this representation need to make clear which
> representation is canonical. Otherwise we end up in a situation in which a
> document that has an ambiguity being unfixable by means of issuing an
> errata
> because there is no agreement as to whether the change is breaking or not.
>
> Another issue that is of concern is that even though the format is not
> intended
> to be an input format, there can be no guarantee it will not be used as
> such.
> Indeed it could be argued that a spec that makes use of this format should
> encourage this approach so as to detect possible ambiguities.
>
> _______________________________________________
> secdir mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir
> wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview
>



-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to