Francesca, thanks for your review. Russ, thanks for your response, which is compelling. I entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Apr 8, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > HKDF is gaining in popularity. The only reason for standards track over informational is to avoid a future issue with a downward reference. > > Russ > > >> On Apr 8, 2019, at 7:51 AM, Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Reviewer: Francesca Palombini >> Review result: Ready >> >> 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-housley-hkdf-oids-01 >> Reviewer: Francesca Palombini >> Review Date: 2019-04-08 >> IETF LC End Date: 2019-04-22 >> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat >> >> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC >> >> Major issues: N/A >> >> Minor issues: N/A >> >> Nits/editorial comments: N/A >> >> Other: IANA registration does not require the document to be on Standard track, >> AFAIK. Is there a reason to go for Proposed Standard rather than Informational >> in this doc? (Also considering RFC7107 is informational) >> >> >
