Hi Sean, On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 08:47:01PM -0700, Sean Turner via Datatracker wrote: > Reviewer: Sean Turner > Review result: Ready > > Hi! Reviewing this because I got asked. I will note that it appears this > document has already been through IETF LC, SECDIR, and GENART among others. > > These two are pretty minor (and look like a secret secdir review): > > 1. I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis refers to DTLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13}. Should > this I-D also refer to DTLS 1.3 [I-D.ietf-tls-dtls13} in s1? Pretty sure > changing the reference isn't going to slow down publication because this I-D > normatively references I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis. > > 2. Assuming that the answer is yes and you could use (D)TLS1.3 with this > protocol, I think you need to say something about or refer to the early data > concerns (see s7.2 of I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis). You might consider just > expand the 2nd sentence in the 1st para of s8 to also refer to s7.2 or > I-D.ietf-dots-rfc8782-bis? Thanks for spotting these; they are good questions to ask (it's what I get for not advancing this document until after DTLS 1.3 got approved). My first reeaction is that there's not a clear reason to pick one route or the other, but I could be missing something. (I agree that changing the reference is unlikely to slow down publication.) -Ben -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
