[Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-06

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Wed, 03 February 2016 05:04 UTC

Return-Path: <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA4BA1A1A7F; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 21:04:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RAJbFt4a0LkV; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 21:04:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usplmg21.ericsson.net (usplmg21.ericsson.net []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF0081A1A7D; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 21:04:21 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f799c6d000007d66-b8-56b18a404ea0
Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain []) by usplmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id D4.B4.32102.04A81B65; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 06:04:00 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB107.ericsson.se ([]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 00:04:20 -0500
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
To: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field.all@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-06
Thread-Index: AdFeQFZKFcnyD1XoQPG7xpxx3mp9zA==
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 05:04:19 +0000
Message-ID: <E87B771635882B4BA20096B589152EF63AB58C7F@eusaamb107.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPuK5D18Ywg+kLVCy+fJjGYnH11WcW ByaPJUt+MgUwRnHZpKTmZJalFunbJXBlPDrwjblguWjFmb75TA2MPwW6GDk5JARMJHrmNbNB 2GISF+6tB7K5OIQEjjBKXJl3hx3CWcYo0bB8CztIFRtQx4adn5lAEiICExglVt7ZxwySEBZw lbiw9jcjiC0i4CVxf/V7VghbT2L15utgcRYBFYm5HZvA4rwCvhLzVxxhAbEZgVZ/P7WGCcRm FhCXuPVkPhPESQISS/acZ4awRSVePv7HCmErSXz8PZ8dol5HYsHuT2wQtrbEsoWvmSHmC0qc nPmEZQKj8CwkY2chaZmFpGUWkpYFjCyrGDlKiwtyctONDDcxAsP6mASb4w7Gvb2ehxgFOBiV eHg3/NkQJsSaWFZcmXuIUYKDWUmE92PtxjAh3pTEyqrUovz4otKc1OJDjNIcLErivHOd14cJ CaQnlqRmp6YWpBbBZJk4OKUaGJX+hoZoTL72IOCABFc9Z4nLKft3L9RmsyiqHsi4Lr2pd5Zo dqNctISphL/gJIayjzf21Gm9Y642smllFOB6eaxheuf+44IL1H4pXrRY3BedvuDMvYdnZ8ok Xdr27uHXzLZps4+qHTVovTdV01Vf+O58m+uT75e/Vd5yNEaqPz4wZl/GVgX+XiWW4oxEQy3m ouJEAK8e1wtnAgAA
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/GodwPL4xLYVI5ResGsiBKit6sTs>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Telechat review of draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-06
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 05:04:23 -0000

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

Document: draft-ietf-ntp-extension-field-06.txt
Reviewer: Suresh Krishnan
Review Date: 2016-02-02
Telechat Date: 2016-02-04

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standard
but has some issues that need to be addressed.

* Major

* Section 3

I could not find the text in RFC5905 Section 7.5 that this draft says it is
replacing. Specifically the following "OLD:" text does not exist in RFC5905

   In NTPv4, one or more extension fields can be inserted after the
   header and before the MAC, if a MAC is present. If a MAC is not
   present, one or more extension fields can be inserted after the
   header, according to the following rules:

   o  If the packet includes a single extension field, the length of the
      extension field MUST be at least 7 words, i.e., at least 28

   o  If the packet includes more than one extension field, the length
      of the last extension field MUST be at least 28 octets. The length
      of the other extension fields in this case MUST be at least 16
      octets each.

After a bit of digging, I did find the verified Erratum #3627 that mentions
the text in RFC5905 being incorrect, but I am not sure the acceptance of the
Erratum implies that the "OLD" text in the RFC has been replaced.

* Minor

* Section

Not sure how the extension fields specify the use of MAC and the
corresponding algorithm. A reference would be good to have.

* Section

Why isn't there a corresponding sender rule for the different MAC algorithm
case that prevents the packet from ever being sent out and consuming bandwidth.

* Section

This sentence is hard to parse. Can you split/reword?

"  A MAC MUST NOT be longer than 24 octets if there is no extension
   field present unless through a previous exchange of packets with an
   extension field which defines the size and algorithm of the MAC
   transmitted in the packet and is agreed upon by both client and