Hi Francesca, thank you for your review. The ticket to track your review is: https://github.com/tlswg/dtls-conn-id/issues/106
cheers! On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 5:22 PM Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> wrote: > > Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id-11: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tls-dtls-connection-id/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thank you for the work on this document. I only have minor comments and nits > below. > > Francesca > > 1. ----- > > sending messages to the client. A zero-length CID value indicates > that the client is prepared to send with a CID but does not wish the > server to use one when sending. > > ... > > to use when sending messages towards it. A zero-length value > indicates that the server will send with the client's CID but does > not wish the client to include a CID. > > FP: clarification question: I am not sure the following formulation is very > clear to me: "to send with a(/the client's) CID". Could "send with" be > rephrased to clarify? The previous paragraph uses "using a CID value", that > would be better IMO. > > 2. ----- > > the record format defined in {{dtls-ciphertext} with the new MAC > > FP: nit - missing "}" in markdown. > > 3. ----- > > The following MAC algorithm applies to block ciphers that use the > with Encrypt-then-MAC processing described in [RFC7366]. > > FP: remove "with" > > 4. ----- > > Section 10.1 > > FP: I believe you should specify 1. what allowed values are for this column > (i.e. Y or N, and what they mean) and 2. what happens to the existing entries > - > namely that they all get "N" value. > > 5. ----- > > Section 10.2 > > FP: Just checking - why is 53 "incompatible with this document"? > > 6. ----- > > Value Extension Name TLS 1.3 DTLS Only Recommended Reference > > FP: nit- s/DTLS Only/DTLS-Only to be consistent with 10.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls -- Thomas _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
