[Gen-art] review of draft-laurie-pki-sunlight-07.txt

Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr> Mon, 18 February 2013 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19CAF21F89D5 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:53:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.932
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G57W0ggpQx7G for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:53:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (givry.fdupont.fr [IPv6:2001:41d0:1:6d55:211:5bff:fe98:d51e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C779B21F890E for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 06:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from givry.fdupont.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by givry.fdupont.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1IErhWQ036131; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:53:43 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dupont@givry.fdupont.fr)
Message-Id: <201302181453.r1IErhWQ036131@givry.fdupont.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 15:53:43 +0100
Sender: Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr
Cc: draft-laurie-pki-sunlight.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-laurie-pki-sunlight-07.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:54:08 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-laurie-pki-sunlight-07.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20130208
IETF LC End Date: 20130226
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Almost Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues:
 - section 2 is not enough accurate, for instance:
  * the critical [k1:k2] notation is introduced after its first use, IMHO
   it is the primary one, i.e., [n] is a short hand for [0:n]
  * the largest power of two must be strictly smaller, not just smaller.
   Without this critical detail recursion rules don't work for n = 2^m
 Unfortunately there is no wikipedia or equivalent web page where to refer to
 so the document is the place where all gory details have to be...

 - the Maximum Merge Delay (MMD) is an important parameter but I can't find
  where is the way users get its value, nor any recommendation for it.

Nits/editorial comments:
 - 1 page 4: CA is not a well known abbrev so please introduce it
  (cf http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt)

 - 1 page 4: it is a general mechanism but what are its constraints at
  the exception of the intended usage. For instance is the mechanism
  applicable to any end entity public key certificate? or larger??

 - 1 page 5: misbehaviours -> misbehaviors
  (and 3.3 page 16, and others too)

 - 1 page 5: e.g. -> e.g.,

 - 2.1.1 page 6: i.e. -> i.e.,

 - 2.1.1 page 7 and 2.1.2 page 8: the wording "the length (k2 - k1) list"
  is IMHO a bit uncommon even I can understand it.

 - 2.1.4 page 10: using a key of at least 2048 bits. ->
  using a public key of at least 2048 bits. (or a modulus as it is for RSA?)

 - 3 pages 13, 14, etc: what is the language used for ASN.1? It is not
  ASN.1 itself, nor C?

 - 3.1 page 12: accomodate -> accommodate

 - 3.1 page 13: parenthesis around 65535 are not necessary (i.e, they
  are insipid and stupid :-)

 - 3.1 page 13: submmited -> submitted

 - 3.2 page 14: opaque TBSCertificate<1..2^16-1> add final ';'

 - 4.6 page 22: honour -> honor

 - 4.6 page 22: convering -> covering? 

BTW if the document creates new OID perhaps they should be put in an annex?

Regards

Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr

PS: I noted there are still some LC comments in the ML.