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://wiki.ietf.org/en/group/gen/GenArtFAQ>.

Document: draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs-14


Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review Date: 2025-05-13
IETF LC End Date: 2025-05-13
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: The draft is generally well-structured and aligns with COSE and CBOR conventions, providing a clear framework for conveying verifiable data structure proofs using COSE receipts.

Major issues: None

Minor issues:
- Section 2: The definition of receipts is awkwardly phrased:
"A COSE header parameter named receipts with a value type of array where the array contains one ore more COSE Receipts..."

Do you mean "receipts is defined as an array of one or more COSE Receipts, as specified in this document."?

- Section 3 (Terminology): 
What does it mean by saying that "Proof Type" is  "A verifiable process,.."
Do you mean "Proof Method"? 

- Section 5.2.1 and 5.3.1 (Receipts): While the document recommends returning a single Boolean verification result, it’s not clearly specified how implementations should differentiate between proof failure vs. signature failure.

- IANA Consideration Issues: The IANA section refers to requested values (e.g., 394, 395, 396) but continues to use TBD_0, TBD_1, TBD_2 inconsistently elsewhere in the draft.


Nits/editorial comments:
Typos: 
- Multiple instances of "ore more" instead of "or more". 
- Phrasing such as "COSE Receipts can include proves that..." → should be "proofs"
- "This document registered a new COSE Header Parameter..." , should it be "registers"?

Best Regards, 
Linda Dunbar