Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-green-secsh-ecc-08.txt

From: "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:00:38 +0200

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-green-secsh-ecc-08.txt
Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Review Date: 2009-07-14
IETF LC End Date: 2009-08-10
Summary: The document is ready for publication as a standard track RFC.

Major issues: none

Minor issues:

- In Section 9.1, second sentence, the text reads: "These curve should 
always be enabled ...." I think the "should" should be elevated to a 
"SHOULD" in this case.

- The IANA Considerations section needs more work. In particular, it does 
not name the registry where IANA has to operate. I am assuming that this 
registry is "Secure Shell (SSH) Protocol Parameters). That registry 
includes several subregistries, of which, this draft is presumably adding 
  new values to the "Public Key Algorithm Names" and "Key Exchange Method 
Names". Please clearly explain what needs to be registered where.

Nits/editorial comments: A couple of minor nits, in case you need to
create a new version of the document

- The third paragraph of Section 6.1 contains an 8-line long sentence. I 
think this sentence could be simplified and chunked into smaller 
sentences, because it is a bit hard to read such long sentences.

- The first paragraph in Section 7 reads ... "... without being granted 
IANA permission". If we are accurate, IANA does not grant any permission. 
Instead IANA acts as a registry. So, most likely you want to say "... 
without requiring an IANA registration process" or something like that.

- Title of Section 9.2, missing white space separated two words.

Regards,

      Miguel
-- 
Miguel A. Garcia
+34-91-339-3608
Ericsson Spain

---

From: Douglas Stebila <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:11:29 +1000

Thanks.  I will make the suggested changes.

Douglas

On 2009-Jul-14, at 8:00 PM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:

> - In Section 9.1, second sentence, the text reads: "These curve  
> should always be enabled ...." I think the "should" should be  
> elevated to a "SHOULD" in this case.
>
> - The IANA Considerations section needs more work. In particular, it  
> does not name the registry where IANA has to operate. I am assuming  
> that this registry is "Secure Shell (SSH) Protocol Parameters). That  
> registry includes several subregistries, of which, this draft is  
> presumably adding  new values to the "Public Key Algorithm Names"  
> and "Key Exchange Method Names". Please clearly explain what needs  
> to be registered where.
>
> - The third paragraph of Section 6.1 contains an 8-line long  
> sentence. I think this sentence could be simplified and chunked into  
> smaller sentences, because it is a bit hard to read such long  
> sentences.
>
> - The first paragraph in Section 7 reads ... "... without being  
> granted IANA permission". If we are accurate, IANA does not grant  
> any permission. Instead IANA acts as a registry. So, most likely you  
> want to say "... without requiring an IANA registration process" or  
> something like that.
>