More Modular Exponentiation (MODP) Diffie-Hellman (DH) Key Exchange (KEX) Groups for Secure Shell (SSH)
RFC 8268

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

(Ben Campbell) Yes

(Kathleen Moriarty) Yes

Comment (2017-09-13 for -07)
No email
send info
Thanks for your work on this draft.  I agree with Alexey's comment on the normative reference and just have a tiny nit for the introduction:

I suggest you remove the word recent since the reference on SHA-1 is 6 years old:
s/Due to recent security concerns with SHA-1 [RFC6194]/Due to security concerns with SHA-1 [RFC6194]/

(Eric Rescorla) Yes

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

Deborah Brungard No Objection

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

Comment (2017-09-13 for -07)
No email
send info
I understand that a new version will be published based on Linda Dunbar's OPS DIR review. Thank you.

(Spencer Dawkins) No Objection

(Suresh Krishnan) No Objection

Warren Kumari No Objection

(Mirja Kühlewind) No Objection

Comment (2017-09-04 for -07)
No email
send info
1) To me this sentence does not belong in the IANA section as it is basically the main point of the document:
"This document augments the Key Exchange Method Names in [RFC4253] and [RFC4250]."
Maybe move it to sec 3?

2) Can you explain why the pre-5378 boilerplate is used?

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

(Alexey Melnikov) No Objection

Comment (2017-09-13 for -07)
No email
send info
RFC 6234 must be normative, as it is required to implement this document.

Alvaro Retana No Objection

(Adam Roach) No Objection

Comment (2017-09-12 for -07)
No email
send info
Section 1, paragraph 2:

   New MODP groups are being
   introduced starting with the MODP 3072-bit group 15 all use SHA512 as
   the hash algorithm.

I can't parse this. Should there be a sentence break between "15" and "all"?

I was surprised to find section 4 here; in part because it isn't related to the addition of new algorithms, but mostly because it's not mentioned in the abstract or the introduction. Please add mention of this erratum correction to both sections.

I'm pretty sure RFC6234 needs to be normative.