Mohamed Boucadair has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-emu-07-00: 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.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-emu/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Please find some minor comments: # (nit) The charter uses different styles to cite RFCs: "The Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) [RFC 3748]" vs "TLS in RFC 8446" "RFC 7258 notes" vs "the EDHOC mechanism (RFC 9528)", etc. Likewise, the charter uses different styles for expanding: "Out-of-band (OOB)" vs. "EDHOC (Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE)". Please use a consistent style. # Some RFC citations will be stale soon (e.g., RFC 8446). Maybe better to soften the use of the RFC labels. # Maybe get rid of some examples inherited from the OLD charter CURRENT: As an example, IETF has standardized a new and improved version.. # Other than 3GPP and VPN that are already from the OLD charter ("authentication framework used, for instance, in VPN and mobile network"), what are the new cases referred to in this part: CURRENT: some new use cases for EAP have been identified # Keep sync with 3GPP updates and PFS Just out of curiosity, is "extension to EAP-AKA' for providing PFS" work coming (requested) from the 3GPP? BTW, the main text promises working on an "extension to EAP-AKA' for providing PFS", but this is not listed in the summary & milestones. # Stale References draft-ietf-oauth-device-flow-13 is already published as RFC8628 _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
