Hi Roman,

thanks for your review! I apparently merged these nits directly into master 
without creating a PR but I guess that's not a problem. They are address in any 
case.

Regarding your other comment, I opened an issue, however, I think this 
recommendation was explicitly discussed and agreed in the wg and therefore I 
would not what to change it without further input from the group. But note that 
the wording says "avoided" and not "forbitten" or anything, so I don't think 
there is a hige diference. Actually I think the more important sentence is the 
last one in this section:
"however, fallback must not silently violate the application's expectation of 
confidentiality or integrity of its payload data."

Mirja



On 21.04.22, 03:07, "Roman Danyliw via Datatracker" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-quic-applicability-16: 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.)


    Please refer to 
https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
    for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


    The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-applicability/



    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    COMMENT:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thank you to Chris Lonvick for the SECDIR review.

    Section 2.
     Specifically, fallback to insecure protocols or to weaker versions of
     secure protocols needs to be avoided.

    Consider if fallback needs to be the default behavior of applications. For
    example:

    Specifically, support for fallback to insecure protocols or to weaker 
versions
    of the secure protocol needs to be evaluated on a per-application basis.

    Section 2.  Typo. s/a application/an application/

    Section 3.2.  Typo. s/mobilty/mobility/

    Section 14.  Typo. s/negotation/negotiation/



Reply via email to