Subject: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-stir-passport-divert-07

From: Pete Resnick via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 21:50:12 -0800

Reviewer: Pete Resnick
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://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Note that while this is labeled a Last Call review, this review comes well
after the Last Call completed. However, the author and AD felt it would be
useful anyway since the document has not yet been updated for Last Call
comments.

Document: draft-ietf-stir-passport-divert-07
Reviewer: Pete Resnick
Review Date: 2020-01-09
IETF LC End Date: 2019-12-02
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: Ready with Nits

While I found the document (and particularly section 4) very technically dense,
I think the detail will help implementers tremendously. Nothing other than a
few editorial issues.

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:

Section 3, paragraph 1:

                                                               Note that
   a new PASSporT is only necessary when the canonical form of the
   "dest" identifier (per the canonicalization procedures in [RFC8224]
   Section 8) changes due to this retargeting.  If the canonical form of
   the "dest" identifiier is not changed during retargeting, then a new
   PASSporT with a "div" claim MUST NOT be produced.

Seems to me that these two sentences should be in their own paragraph. It took
me a second to figure out that the following sentence was not related to these.

Section 4:

   ...Other using protocols of PASSporT

Don't you mean "Other protocols using PASSporT"?

Section 4.2, paragraph 2:

I think you mean "necessarily", not "necessary"