Subject: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-secevent-http-push-10

From: Vijay Gurbani via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 08:17:28 -0700

Reviewer: Vijay Gurbani
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-ietf-secevent-http-push-??
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: 2020-05-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-05-13
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The document is ready as a Proposed Standard with minor changes as indicated below.

Major issues: 0

Minor issues: 1

Nits/editorial comments: 1

Below, "Sn" denotes "Section n".

- S2, page 4: "The SET Recipient SHOULD NOT perform extensive business logic 
 that processes the event expressed by the SET prior to sending this 
 response.  Such logic SHOULD be executed asynchronously from delivery, 
 in order to minimize the expense and impact of SET delivery on the 
 SET Transmitter." ==> I understand the need for this normative text, 
 however, what happens if at some later point from when the SET Recipient
 sent a response, the business logic is executed and the logic decides 
 that the SET is invalid.  What does a SET Recipient do now?  

Nits:

- S2.3, page 7: s/Access token is expired./Access token has expired./
             or s/Access token is expired./Access token expired./
 (Reason: "is" is present tense, "expired" is past, so the grammar in the
 original sentence is incongruous.)