Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review result: Ready with Issues I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-cose-countersign-06 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 2022-07-22 IETF LC End Date: 2022-08-10 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Almost ready with one minor issue and several nits. I do not understand how it is decided what the count of bstr fields is which is needed to determine if the other_fields mechanism is invoked. Are all the standard fields included? And could other_fields be included in an example please? Constructing an example would be helpful for both author and users I think. Major issues: None Minor issues: s3.3, description of 'other_fields': I am confused as to which bstr's count towards the 'only two' condition. All the fields after 'context' are encoded as bstr so are all these involved in the count? Also I couldn't see an example which appeared to showcase how 'other_fields' is used. This might well have helped. Nits/editorial comments: Abstract: Idnits is thoroughly confused by the document claiming to update RFC 8152 when it is actually updating an RFC that hasn't been published yet. Given that rfc8152bis (RFC-to-be 9052) hasn't been published yet, I wonder if a note about countersigning could be added into that document. But in any case this document updates RFC 9052. General: Use of " rather than ' for quoted strings. [s1.3 (6 places), s3.3 (2 places)] s1.3: s/Byte is a synonym for octet./"Byte" is a synonym for "octet" in this document./ s1, para 3: I think this needs a little expansion: "the inclusion of more of values in the countersignature". At least s/of more of values/of the content of additional fields/ (if I understand correctly). s2, para 3: s/Details on version 2/Details of version 2/ s3, para 2: s/This is same structure/This is of the same structure/ s3.3, para 1: s/takes in countersignature/takes in the countersignature/ s5.2, last para: s/"(Deprecated by [[This Document]]"./"(Deprecated by [[This Document]])"./ [Missing closing bracket.] s7.1: For the record there seems to be some lack of clarity as to whether there are two or three different languages supported. The 'Languages' line says 3 languages but only mentions Java and C#. Further on in 'Testing', Java, C# and C are mentioned. Since this section will be removed before publication it is not of great importance but would be good to get it right. I couldn't see a C implementation in the cose-wg repository. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
