I am the assigned IoT Directorate reviewer for this draft. The Directorate aims to review IETF documents related with IoT (Internet of Things). Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/iotdir/about/

Thank you editors for taking into consideration the feedback in my early review, specifically.
The latest version is in good shape and easy to digest. A few more editorial comments and suggestions as follows:
1. Can you distinguish term definitions and abbreviations in the terminology section, e.g., VAR is frequent occurred abbreviation, it will be nice to introduce abbreviation separately in the terminology section 1.1.
2. Section 1.2 said:
"
   There are DHCP options that a network operator can use to configure
   devices such as a VoIP phone.  DHCP options 66, 150 (TFTP/HTTP server
   names), option 120 (SIP Server), or even option 157 (Certificate
   Provisioning) 
"
Can you add reference to new introduced DHCP options?
3. Can you add a legend for "VR-sign(N)"? Also there are no text in section 2 to explain "VR-sign(N)".

4. Section 5 said:
"In the event of a merger between two companies, then the mechanism that is described in section 7.2 MAY be applicable.
"
The mechanism in section 7.2 May be applicable for what??, It seems not complete.

5. Section 7.1 said:
"
The Provisional TLS connection does not do [RFC9525],
Section 6.3 DNS-ID verification at the beginning of the connection,
so a forced redirection to a captive portal system will not be
detected.
"
Are you saying Provisional TLS Connection does not do DNS-ID Verification, if yes, suggest to move
"[RFC9525] Section 6.3" after DNS-ID verification.

6. Section 7.1 said:
"
It is RECOMMENDED therefore that the Pledge look for [RFC8910]
   attributes in DHCP, and if present, use the [RFC8908] API to learn if
   it is captive.
"
NEW TEXT:
"
It is RECOMMENDED therefore that the Pledge look for Captive-Portal Identification
 attributes [RFC8910] in DHCP, and if present, use the Captive-Portal API [RFC8908] to learn if
it is captive.
"