Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-housley-ers-asn1-modules-02

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:51:35 +0300

Linda, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document.

Lars

> On 2021-7-20, at 3:04, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> 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>.
> 
> Document: draft-housley-ers-asn1-modules-??
> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review Date: 2021-07-19
> IETF LC End Date: 2021-08-13
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> This document offers alternate ASN.1 modules that conform to the 2002 version
> of ASN.1 for Evidence Record Syntax (ERS).
> 
> Question:
> Is the Evidence Record Syntax specified in this draft going to obsolete RFC4998?
> 
> How come the AlgorithmIdentifier in this draft is slightly different from the
> AlgorithmIdentifier in RFC4998?
> 
> This draft has:
> 
> AlgorithmIdentifier{}, DIGEST-ALGORITHM
>  FROM AlgorithmInformation-2009 -- in [RFC5912]
>     { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)
>       security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7) id-mod(0)
>      id-mod-algorithmInformation-02(58) }
> 
> RFC4998 has:
> AlgorithmIdentifier
>    FROM PKIX1Explicit88
>         { iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
>            internet(1) security(5) mechanisms(5) pkix(7)
>            mod(0) pkix1-explicit(18) }
> 
> RFC4998's pkix1-explicit(18) is not present in this draft. Is it intended?
> 
> Best Regards,
> Linda Dunbar
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art