Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-housley-hkdf-oids-01

From: Alissa Cooper <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 20:40:15 -0400

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 <[email-masked]> 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 <[email-masked]> 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)
>> 
>> 
>