Job: These look good to me. Thanks for th e quick response. Russ > On Aug 11, 2022, at 8:24 PM, Job Snijders <job=40fastly.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Dear Russ, > > Many thanks for your review, your CMS / ASN.1 expertise much > appreciated and has been helpful in the production of this document. > > I incorporated all your points, did I get them right? > > https://github.com/job/draft-rpki-checklists/commit/96d8119cc7335b7a66894170ee56aafacb7b494a > > Kind regards, > > Job > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 03:25:46PM -0700, Russ Housley via Datatracker wrote: >> Reviewer: Russ Housley >> Review result: Ready with Nits >> >> I am the assigned ARTART reviewer for this Internet-Draft. >> >> Document: draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-rsc-08 >> Reviewer: Russ Housley >> Review Date: 2022-08-11 >> IETF LC End Date: 2022-08-24 >> IESG Telechat date: unknown >> >> Summary: Ready with Nits >> >> Major Concerns: None. >> >> Minor Concerns: None. >> >> Nits: >> >> Abstract: The document says that it defines a CMS profile, but it is >> really defining a CMS protected content type. Suggestion: >> >> This document defines a Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) protected >> content type for use with the Resource Public Key Infrastructure >> (RPKI) to carry a general purpose listing of checksums (a >> 'checklist'). The objective is to allow an attestation of a RPKI >> Signed Checklist (RSC), which contains one or more checksums of >> arbitrary digital objects (files) that are signed "with resources", >> and the allow for validation to confirm that a specific Internet >> Resource Holder produced the RSC. The protected CMS content type is >> intended to provide for the signing of an arbitrary checksum listing >> with a specific set of Internet Number Resources. >> >> In addition, similar changes should be made the the Introduction. >> >> Section 2.1: s/CA/Certification Authority (CA)/ >> >> Section 2.1: s/EE/End-Entity (EE)/ >> >> Section 3 says: >> >> The ContentType for an RSC is defined as rpkiSignedChecklist, and has >> the numerical value of 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1.48. >> >> This paragraph should say that 1.2.840.113549.1.9.16.1.48 is an object >> identifier (OID). >> >> Section 4: I compiled the ASN.1 module. It compiles fine; however, >> some of the lines exceed 73 characters. It would be good to insert >> line breaks so that the RFC Editor will not need to reformat the >> module. >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Sidrops mailing list > Sidrops@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
