Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review result: Ready with Nits 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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>. Document: draft-ietf-dnsop-compact-denial-of-existence-05 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 2024-12-30 IETF LC End Date: 2024-12-23 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: Ready with some minor nits. I am not sufficiently involved in (secure) DNS to validate the technical proposal, but the draft is clear and makes good sense to me, Sorrry the review is a little late... Christmas caught up with me! I am unsure whether the updates for RFC 4035 in Section 6.2 imply that there is an erratum applying to RFC 4035: The added text is .....This concern only applies to implementations of DNSSEC that employ pre-computed signatures. There is an exception to this rule for online signing implementations of DNSSEC (e.g Minimally Covering NSEC, and Compact Denial of Existence (RFC TBD), where dynamically generated NSEC records can be produced for owner names that don't exist or are empty non-terminals. This update appears to apply retrospectively to the approved version of RFC 4035 as well as if the current RFC is approved. I haven't checked if this is already covered by an erratum. Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: Globally: s/e.g. /e.g., / and s/i.e. /i.e., / s1, para 1: It might be worth pointing explicitly to RFC 4470 when epsilon functions are mentioned (OK, RFC 4470 is mentioned on the previous line but for those not in the know...) s1, end of para 1: s/at the name/for the name/ possibly. s7: This section should be marked for removal by the RFC Editor on publication as it is not future proof. s10: This section should be redrafted to remove the distinction between done and to be done items. The notes about what has been pre-allocated should be in an RFC editor note to be removed on publication. -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
