[Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 12 November 2013 03:30 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64A911E81AB; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.068, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sFp42WzlsmDJ; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x235.google.com (mail-pd0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC68011E81A5; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f181.google.com with SMTP id p10so1630515pdj.12 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xzweailBoOCZ8LiUuBL7mnAfOGFwcSoGLcz4Bm4lO7U=; b=w/ReN6dxrpWjavTJxKkzSvU/LABmS906pFJ31gXmqlyzBKD+EuAyFBGPU70C9DfWLs btUdmHo9ZBGGqYcq9DHy18Ioep0w7mrcfmeFh6mg+z/fyAi7RRiOnZtqvwHXRzA2JEHL GZwAbrcPpALt77KA0LIb47YuHD8lF/slnvE8WlBJUxWUbskzU+OFKR2Ljd/1wwuESmj8 ETH4x8+mfPh1Hw8vDCNwReqyEdifvN3TgJyTPF5eBtVdXSB6elFniodwzolIykTUUM8A XEvsTjwtjI+lH7749SVXlkRz1i6/bx/adYjrmw/XQaYIzGaluvqEfvuqlze8xGoTs+Aa fNww==
X-Received: by 10.66.51.34 with SMTP id h2mr904719pao.181.1384227013577; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] (34.198.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.198.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id pu5sm39987293pac.21.2013.11.11.19.30.10 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:30:12 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5281A0C4.6020209@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 16:30:12 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: draft-ietf-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.all@tools.ietf.org, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ospf@ietf.org
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 03:30:15 -0000

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-ospf-rfc6506bis-01.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2013-11-12
IETF LC End Date: 2013-11-26
IESG Telechat date:

Summary:  Ready with issues
--------

Major issue:
------------

The listed changes from RFC 6506 include:

>    2.  Section 3 previously advocated usage of an expired key for
>        transmitted OSPFv3 packets when no valid keys existed.  This
>        statement has been removed.

I cannot see where this has been removed. In the last paragraph of
Section 3, the text starting:

> In the event that the last key associated with an interface expires,...

has not been changed. Isn't that the text that should be removed? In fact,
shouldn't it be explicitly contradicted, to ensure that implementations
are changed to fail-secure rather than run-insecure?


Nits:
-----

"errata" is a plural, often misused in this draft as a singular. The singular
noun is "erratum".

	
> This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF	
> Contributions published or made publicly available before November	
> 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this	
  ...

This disclaimer logically cannot be needed, since RFC6506 was published
after Nov. 10, 2008.



> 6.  Security Considerations
...
>   It addresses all the security
>   issues that have been identified in [RFC6039].

and in [RFC6506] (judging by section 1.2).