[dhcwg] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-03

Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 18 June 2020 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CBD83A0F65; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:40:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: <secdir@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dhc-v6only.all@ietf.org, dhcwg@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.3.2
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <159251281326.28009.2445308597820373796@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:40:13 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/uA9IS3REkvvILU7qe1wJlsuTcqk>
Subject: [dhcwg] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-03
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 20:40:13 -0000

Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review result: Has Nits

I 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 authors, document editors, and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments.

Document: draft-ietf-dhc-v6only-03
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2020-06-18
IETF LC End Date: 2020-07-02
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Has Nits


Major Concerns:

None.


Minor Concerns:

Section 3.4 includes:

    V6ONLY_WAIT     The minimum time the client SHOULD stop the DHCPv4
                    configuration process for. MUST be no less than
                    MIN_V6ONLY_WAIT seconds. Default: 1800 seconds

The second sentence should include a subject; and "MUST NOT" seems like
a better wording to me.  I suggest:

    V6ONLY_WAIT     The minimum time for which the client SHOULD stop
                    the DHCPv4 configuration process. The value MUST NOT
                    be less than MIN_V6ONLY_WAIT seconds.
                    Default: 1800 seconds.


Nits:

Section 2: s/seems only natural/seems natural/

Section 3.3.1: s/for V6ONLY_WAIT second/for V6ONLY_WAIT seconds/