Hi Scott,
I think the original at least partially worked, as the authors/shepherd
have told me they plan to update the document accordingly.
Thank you for the review!
-Ben
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 09:26:11AM -0500, Scott Bradner wrote:
> I am resending this because the review tool seems to have failed to properly distribute it
>
> Scott
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Scott Bradner <
[hidden email]>
> > Subject: [OPS-DIR] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility-04
> > Date: February 17, 2019 at 3:21:29 PM EST
> > To: <
[hidden email]>
> > Cc:
[hidden email],
[hidden email],
[hidden email]
> >
> > Reviewer: Scott Bradner
> > Review result: Has Nits
> >
> > This is an OPS-DIR review of PKINIT Algorithm Agility
> > (draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-alg-agility). This ID updates PKINIT following the
> > guidelines in BCP 201 to make it algorithm agile and to expose acceptable
> > algorithms.
> >
> > This is a very well written clear document. I do not find any operational
> > issues with the document except that the document could use a section on
> > interoperability (old server-new client, new server-old client).
> >
> > There are a few words about the topic deep in section 6 about the supportedKDFs
> > field but I do not see a general discussion or a discussion about the kdf
> > field. The text about the supportedKDFs field could be moved to a new section
> > and each of the old/new combinations could be addressed. I see this as an
> > operational issue because compatibility issues are a frequent source of
> > operational headaches.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OPS-DIR mailing list
> >
[hidden email]
> >
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-dir>
_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten
Locked
