RFC 2986 is already in the downref registry, so that is not a concern. The reference to RFC 2510 could be updated to point to Section 3 of RFC 6712. I think that the reference to RFC 5246 should be kept as it is. Russ > On Nov 22, 2022, at 6:15 PM, Sheng Jiang via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Reviewer: Sheng Jiang > Review result: Ready with Nits > > I have reviewed this document as part of the IntArea directorate's ongoing > effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. Comments that > are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews during the IESG > review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like > any other last call comments. > > Document: draft-ietf-lamps-lightweight-cmp-profile-15 > Reviewer: Sheng Jiang > Review Date: 2022-11-23 > Result: Ready with Nits > > This Standards Track document specifies a lightweight PKI management > operations based on matured CMP (Certificate Management Protocol), > CRMF (Certificate Request Message Format, and HTTP-based or CoAP-based > transfer. The mechanism is operable. This document is well-written > and READY with minor Nits (below) for publication. > > Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC 2986 > Two obsolete informational references: > RFC 2510 has obsoleted by RFC 4210 > RFC 5246 has obsoleted by RFC 8446 > > Regards, > > Sheng -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
