Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyn...@cisco.com> wrote:
> As the text has changed a lot, not so much on the technical content but
> more or completeness and readability, I will re-submit it to another
> IESG evaluation early January in the hope that the IESG will approve
> this draft.
Thank you.
> May I kindly request the authors to fix the idnits issues ?
>
https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation-24.txt
> it is about a reference to RFC 6125 or its -bis and the use of
> obsoleted RFC 5077.
The text says:
The HNA will validate the DM's control channel certificate by doing
[RFC6125]/[I-D.ietf-uta-rfc6125bis] DNS-ID check on the name.
The word "an" ought to be in front of [RFC6125].
I think that idnits is confused.
I thought the UTA document was just a patch on RFC6125, but I see that it's a
complete replacement, so referencing both makes less sense.
As for RFC5077. I have replaced it with RFC8446 (TLS1.3), section 4.6.1, but
the reference feels less useful now.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
