Mahesh Jethanandani has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-grow-nrtm-v4-09: 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-grow-nrtm-v4/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Section 6.4, paragraph 3 > * Implementations MUST support ES256 for interoperability. The > algorithm MUST NOT be Deprecated, and it is RECOMMENDED to use > Recommended or Recommended+ algorithms, as listed in the IANA JOSE > Algorithms registry [IANA_jose]. The requirement of support for ES256 is reasonable, but the document should ensure it does not exclude future widely adopted algorithms such as PQC once they reach recommended status. A brief future-proofing note would be useful. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NIT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you did with these suggestions. Section 7.3, paragraph 10 > and object class name are not case sensitive and therefore mirror clients M > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This word is normally spelled with a hyphen. Section 7.3, paragraph 10 > efore mirror clients MUST use case insensitive matching against their local > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This word is normally spelled with a hyphen. Section 8.1, paragraph 1 > ECOMMENDED to use NTP [RFC5905] synchronisation to avoid timing discrepancies > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Do not mix variants of the same word ("synchronisation" and "synchronization") within a single text. _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
