Hi Joe and others,

Thanks for your comments.  At least one of the co-authors is traveling about.  It will be a little more than a week before I reply in substance.

Eliot

On 14.04.22 17:38, Joe Clarke (jclarke) wrote:
A number of comments as a contributor:

* The tree diagram doesn't reference RFC8340 (see RFC8407 Section 3.4)

* The description of the transparency-extension grouping is a tautology.  This is one of my pet peeves.  Can you add more flavor here?

* Replace use of s/w and h/w with software and hardware respectively.

* Would it make sense to further refine your contact leafs to check for the MUST URI schemas?

* Your description for sbom-url and vuln-url are different.  One says statically located URI whereas the other says statically located URL.  I think the latter is correct.

* The type for sbom-local-well-known is an enum.  Would it make sense to make this an identityref so that other schemes may be used in the future?

* When you say "customers" in this document, I think "users" is a better term.

* Your example in Section 5.1 also uses the "ol" extension.  I think you should omit that in this draft for better clarity.

* In your security considerations, I don't grok this text:

In as much as the module itself is

made writeable, this only indicates a change in how to retrieve what

read-only elements.

But it does raise a question: why are these objects read-write? I'd think they'd be more operational and read-only from a Thing or device.

* Section 8: "review" is misspelled.

Joe

On 4/12/22 07:16, Henk Birkholz wrote:
Dear OPSAWG members,

this email starts a three week period for a Working Group Last Call of

  >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-sbom-access/05/

ending on Wednesday, April 27th.

The authors believe the Internet-Draft is ready for a WGLC. The draft
has been discussed at meetings, as well as on the list, and review
feedback has been incorporated in -05.

Please send your comments to the list and your assessment of whether or
not it is ready to proceed to publication before April 27th.


For the OPSAWG co-chairs,

Henk

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg



_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to