Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-tls-8773bis-10: 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-tls-8773bis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Russ, Thanks for the effort put into this specification. I only reviewed the diff vs RFC8773. # I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis should be listed as normative. # I-D.ietf-emu-bootstrapped-tls should be cited as informational given that the only citation is: CURRENT: Another motivation is the use of a public key with a factory- provisioned secret value for the initial enrollment of a device in an enterprise network [I-D.ietf-emu-bootstrapped-tls]. # Nit: for readers convenience, please point to the exact section where this is defined OLD: The Extension structure is defined in [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis]; it is repeated here for convenience. NEW: The Extension structure is defined in Section 4.2 of [I-D.ietf-tls-rfc8446bis]; it is repeated here for convenience. Cheers, Med _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
