Last Call Review of draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06
review-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06-genart-lc-dunbar-2019-09-20-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-acme-tls-alpn
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-09-25
Requested 2019-09-11
Authors Roland Shoemaker
Draft last updated 2019-09-20
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Daniel Migault (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Artart Last Call review of -06 by Martin Thomson (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Linda Dunbar
State Completed
Review review-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06-genart-lc-dunbar-2019-09-20
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/PvAOY8Gm--3bNHWzotofU947xQE
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 07)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2019-09-20

Review
review-ietf-acme-tls-alpn-06-genart-lc-dunbar-2019-09-20

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-acme-tls-alpn-06
Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review Date: 2019-09-20
IETF LC End Date: 2019-09-25
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:
This document specifies a new "challenges" for Automated Certificate Management Environment 

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
The 3rd paragraph of the Introduction stated that this New Challenges requires negotiating a new application layer protocol, but no existing software implements this protocol. Therefore the ability to fulfill this challenges is effectively "opt-in". 
I find the statement is quite confusing. Does it mean that it is necessary to manually add processing to handle the challenge because  there is no implementation of auto negotiation? 

Thanks, 
Linda Dunbar