Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks-04

Thanks for your review, Dan. I have balloted a No Objection based on this.

Jari

On May 13, 2013, at 1:30 PM, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> wrote:

> 
> 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-ipsecme-dh-checks-04
> Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
> Review Date: 5/13/13
> IETF LC End Date: 5/20/13
> IESG Telechat date: 
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This document is Ready. It is clearly written and easy to follow, even for a non-expert in security. I appreciated the sections that describe the transition to implementations that support the update and the ones that describe behavior upon test failures - which are of value to implementers and operators. One minor issue related to the IANA registry may be only an issue of clarification. 
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> The IANA Considerations Sections mention that Groups 27-30 have been recently defined in [I-D.merkle-ikev2-ke-brainpool]. This is an Informational Reference which is somehow odd, because without this reference the IANA actions could not be completed. On the other hand making [I-D.merkle-ikev2-ke-brainpool] Normative Reference would create a downref because the later is informational. I believe this is OK, because I see the document in RFC Editor Queue waiting for IANA actions, which may actually be exactly the ones described in this I-D, but a cleaner solution would have been not defining at all Groups 27-30 here. 
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art