Russ Housley | 19 Sep 00:23 2014

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2014-09-18
IETF LC End Date: 2014-09-30
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary:  Ready.

Major Concerns:  None.
Minor Concerns:  None.
Other Comments:  None.
A. Jean Mahoney | 18 Sep 22:52 2014

A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2014-09-18

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Francis Dupont    2014-09-29   draft-ietf-forces-packet-parallelization-02

Joel Halpern      2014-09-29   draft-ietf-oauth-jwt-bearer-10

Martin Thomson    2014-09-29   draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-08

Meral Shirazipour 2014-09-29   draft-ietf-oauth-saml2-bearer-21

Peter Yee         2014-09-29   draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-roaming-analysis-05

Robert Sparks     2014-09-30   draft-ietf-6man-why64-05

Roni Even         2014-09-30   draft-ietf-multimob-fmipv6-pfmipv6-multicast-08

Russ Housley      2014-09-30   draft-ietf-appsawg-authres-ptypes-registry-03

Scott Brim        2014-09-30   draft-ietf-eppext-reg-08

Vijay Gurbani     2014-09-29   draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-17 *

* 2nd LC

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
(Continue reading)

Jari Arkko | 18 Sep 16:02 2014
Picon

Re: Gen-ART review of draft-dukhovni-opportunistic-security-01

martin,

Thank you for this and other reviews.

This is also an acknowledgement that we’ve seen the review (I always look at these reviews before
recommending a position for the IESG review, which is happening today for this document). I have not filed
issues specifically relating to your comments, but there is a more general discussion about the
document. Stay tuned.

Jari

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Romascanu, Dan (Dan | 18 Sep 12:27 2014

Gen-ART review for draft-ietf-grow-ix-bgp-route-server-operations

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

 

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

 

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

 

Document: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-grow-ix-bgp-route-server-operations-03.txt

Reviewer: Dan Romascanu

Review Date: 9/18/14

IETF LC End Date: 9/22/14

IESG Telechat date: none

 

Summary:

 

A useful and very well written document, with a few minor issues that need clarification and fixes before publication

 

Major issues:

 

None

 

Minor issues:

 

1.       The reference [RS-ARCH] mentioned in 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2 is not reachable (Error 404). As the understanding of the issues described in the two sections depend on this reference, a valid reference is required.

2.       Section 4.2.1.3 uses the term ‘flat layer 2 network’ which has at least two meanings depending on the context or layer – either one VLAN space at the link layer (as to differentiate from Customer VLAN and Provider VLAN) or a bridged network with no routers between the bridged segments. Clarification is needed.

3.       The usage of keywords is inconsistent in a few place. In 4.6.1 the ‘should’ in the second paragraph needs to be capitalized. In 4.6.3 we have a capitalized SHOULD, but then a non-capitalized ‘may’ for statements that both seem to describe requirements of the same level.

4.       I am doubt that Section 4.7 is that useful. On one hand reliability of layer 2 forwarding is not in my opinion such a big issue, and measures can be taken a the link layer to improve it (use lags or redundant paths). Second the recommended mitigation (RFC 5881 BFD) is described as non-optimal, with no other alternative. I would just drop this section completely.

  

Nits/editorial comments:

 

1.       The English syntax of the second paragraph in the Abstract is broken.

2.       In the introduction there is a mention of ‘using shared Layer-2 networking media such as Ethernet’. Actually Ethernet is seldom used nowadays as a shared media, I would just recommend saying ‘using data link layers protocols such as Ethernet’

3.       In section 4.2 s/optimization technique is implemented/optimization technique that is implemented/

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art <at> ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Tom Taylor | 17 Sep 03:44 2014
Picon

Pre-telechat review of draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-02

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
< http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-02
Reviewer: Tom Taylor
Review Date: 2014-09-16
IETF LC End Date: 2014-05-29
IESG Telechat date: 2014-09-18

Summary: This draft is good to go. No issues or nits.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
Ben Campbell | 12 Sep 01:19 2014

Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-14

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document:  
draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-14
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2014-09-11
IETF LC End Date: 2014-09-11

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a proposed standard, but there are open issues that
should be addressed first.

Note: I have not attempted to verify the pseudocode fragments in this draft. 

Major issues:

[Note: I am on the fence on whether the following is a major or minor issue. I put it in the major section to draw
attention to it, but I am prepared to downgrade it if discussion seems to suggest doing so.]

-- Section 9.4, SSRC Management

If I read this section correctly, the draft requires central management of SSRC values when you have a
master key shared among endpoints in a SRTP session, and goes so far to require authentication of data a
central SSRC manager. This seems like a pretty big architectural change to the handling of SSRC that would
likely be an impediment to deployment.  I also have to wonder if such an SSRC manager could become a central
point of attack.

I note that RFC 3711, section 9.1 talks about what I gather is the same issue, and does not seem to call for a
central SSRC manager. Are the requirements here that different than for 3711?

Minor issues:

-- General:

There are a number of instances of 2119 normative language that I suspect do not define new normative
requirements as much as repeat normative requirements from elsewhere (either in this draft, or from
elsewhere.) This creates confusion on which text is authoritative, and creates an opportunity for
inconsistent normative statements about the same thing. I strongly suggest that anytime you repeat or
summarize normative text that is authoritatively stated elsewhere, you either use descriptive
(non-normative) language (e.g., Foo is required to bar the baz), or clearly attribute the source (e.g.
[XXX] says that foo MUST bar the baz.)

-- References:

The draft has normative down ref to RFC 3610. This was not explicitly mentioned in the IETF last call email,
and does not appear to be included in the down ref registry.

-- 8.1:

If this draft contradicts normative language from RFC 3711, it should explicitly update 3711.

-- 8.2

Can you offer guidance on when it might be (or not be) necessary to disguise the length of the plaintext? 
Especially how that might be known at the SRTP layer?

-- 14.1:

Does the master salt need to be kept secret? If the answer is "it depends", can you offer guidance?

Also, can you offer a definition of "properly erased"?

Nits/editorial comments:

-- There is a citation of RFC2675, but it doesn't appear in the references.

-- The abstract is out of place (Should be at beginning.)

-- section 1, third paragraph: "... provides a high level of security ..."

That may change over time. I suggest prefacing with "At the time of this writing..."

-- section 3, last paragraph:

Please expand IV on first mention.

-- section 5.3, last paragraph:

First and last sentence seem to contradict each other.

-- 15.1:

The IANA registration section for the SDES crypto-suites is oddly stated. That registry is just a table;
the use of the srtp-crypto-suite-ext ABNF construction may be confusing.
Vijay K. Gurbani | 12 Sep 00:14 2014

Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-6lo-ghc-04

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-6lo-ghc-04
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: Sep-11-2014
IETF LC End Date: Ended
IESG Telechat date: Sep-18-2014

This document is ready as a Proposed Standard.  I reviewed -03 and my
comments from that have been fixed in -04.  I have no more comments.

Major: 0
Minor: 0
Nits: 0

Thanks,

- vijay
--

-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg <at> {bell-labs.com,acm.org} / vijay.gurbani <at> alcatel-lucent.com
Web: http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/  | Calendar: http://goo.gl/x3Ogq
A. Jean Mahoney | 11 Sep 23:10 2014

Assignments for the 2014-09-18 Telechat

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer            LC end       Draft
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elwyn Davies        2014-08-07   draft-ietf-savi-dhcp-29 *

Joel Halpern        2014-08-22 draft-ietf-dnsop-child-syncronization-03 *
Joel Halpern        2014-08-04 draft-masotta-tftpexts-windowsize-opt-11 *

Martin Thomson      2014-08-05 draft-dukhovni-opportunistic-security-04 *

Roni Even           2014-08-11   draft-ietf-netmod-snmp-cfg-07 *

Tom Taylor          2014-05-29   draft-moonesamy-sshfp-ed25519-02 *

Vijay Gurbani       2014-08-29   draft-ietf-6lo-ghc-04 *

Wassim Haddad       2014-09-01   draft-ietf-bfd-intervals-04

* Earlier draft reviewed
** Already reviewed

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
http://art.tools.ietf.org/tools/art/genart/

And the assignments are captured in the spreadsheets:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art.html
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art-by-reviewer.html

For your convenience, the review boilerplate template is included below.

Note that reviews should ideally be posted to the gen-art mailing list
by COB on Tuesday:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/

Jean

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
< http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document:
Reviewer:
Review Date:
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
A. Jean Mahoney | 11 Sep 23:04 2014

A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2014-09-11

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Christer Holmberg 2014-09-22   draft-ietf-opsec-bgp-security-05

Dan Romascanu     2014-09-22   draft-ietf-grow-ix-bgp-route-server-operations-03

Elwyn Davies      2014-09-25   draft-ietf-dmm-best-practices-gap-analysis-07

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
http://art.tools.ietf.org/tools/art/genart/

And the assignments are captured in the spreadsheets:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art.html
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art-by-reviewer.html

The standard template is included below.

Thanks,

Jean

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document:
Reviewer:
Review Date:
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:
Brian E Carpenter | 6 Sep 04:31 2014
Picon

Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-kyzivat-case-sensitive-abnf-01

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-kyzivat-case-sensitive-abnf-01.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2014-09-06
IETF LC End Date: 2014-09-30
IESG Telechat date:

Summary:   Ready with nits
--------

Comment:
--------

The writeup says this draft was discussed on the "abnf-discuss" list. When I looked,
the mail archive for abnf-discuss <at> ietf.org hadn't been updated since May 2012. Is there
some other list?

Nits:
-----

> Abstract
>
>   This document extends the base definition of ABNF (Augmented Mackus-
>   Naur Form)

s/Mackus/Backus/

> 1. Introduction
>
>   The base definition of ABNF (Augmented Mackus-Naur Form) supports
>   ASCII string literals.

s/Mackus/Backus/
A. Jean Mahoney | 4 Sep 21:33 2014

A *new* batch of IETF LC reviews - 2014-09-04

Hi all,

The following reviewers have assignments:

Reviewer          LC end       Draft
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Brian Carpenter   2014-09-30   draft-kyzivat-case-sensitive-abnf-01

I have made the assignments in the review tool:
http://art.tools.ietf.org/tools/art/genart/

And the assignments are captured in the spreadsheets:
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art.html
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/dav/genart/gen-art-by-reviewer.html

The standard template is included below.

Thanks,

Jean

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document:
Reviewer:
Review Date:
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

Gmane