I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. The summary of the review is Ready with Nits. It's not clear to me whether there are any replacement specs for the crypto suites being declared Historic. Are the remaining crypto suites for these protocols of comparable strength and security properties? More concretely, Section 5 says: "5. Impact of Reclassifying the Suite-B-related RFCs to Historic No interoperability or security concerns are raised by reclassifing the Suite-B-related RFCs to Historic Status." It would be helpful to have some explanation. For example, is it true that none of the RFCs being moved to Historic Status is the sole specification of an algorithm or an identifier for an algorithm that we expect people to continue using? Also there's a typo: "reclassifing" should be "reclassifying". Similarly, in Section 7: "7. Security Considerations The CNSA Suite includes algorithms using the larger key sizes that are included in Suite B. There are no interoperability or security concerns raised by reclassifying the Suite-B-related RFCs to Historic Status." Will there be forthcoming specs for using CNSA Suite algorithms with these protocols? Best regards, -Taylor