I have insufficient security expertise to review the details of this draft, but it seems to be complete and well written.
Section 4.2 "Message Exchange" refers to a diagram stored on GitHub in PNG format. It's a nice diagram, but I think that it's a bad idea to embed a GitHub URL in an RFC. This may be too much to ask, but an overview diagram in the same format as Figure 2 would be great. Regards Brian Carpenter On 20-Mar-23 21:45, Sheng JIANG wrote:
Dear ANIMAers, This message starts the two-week (*) ANIMA Working Group Last Call to advance draft-ietf-anima-brski-ae-04, which defines an enhancement of Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key Infrastructure (BRSKI, RFC 8995) that supports alternative certificate enrollment protocols. This document's intended status is Standards Track. At present, there is no IPR filed against this document. This document has been ANIMA WG document since July, 2020 (with name draft-ietf-anima-brski-async-enroll at that time. It renamed after 5 updates April 2022.) and has received a lot of feedback from the WG and work from its authors. The authors therefore think is ready for WGLC. Please send your comments by April 3rd 2023. If you do not feel this document should advance, please state your reasons why. Toerless Eckert is the assigned document shepherd. Regards, Sheng for the chairs _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
