Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art last call review of draft-ietf-karp-ospf-analysis-05

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Mon, 26 November 2012 17:38 UTC

From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
To: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
References: <1352132615.23621.1264.camel@mightyatom.folly.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:38:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: <1352132615.23621.1264.camel@mightyatom.folly.org.uk> (Elwyn Davies's message of "Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:23:35 +0000")
Message-ID: <tsl38zw2rk6.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-karp-ospf-analysis.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art last call review of draft-ietf-karp-ospf-analysis-05
Precedence: list

Hi. Thanks for your review.
In my edit buffer, I have made changes that are responsive to all your comments except one
nit:

>>>>> "Elwyn" == Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com> writes:
    Elwyn> s3, para 1:
    >> As discussed, neither version of OSPF meets the requirements of
    >> inter-connection or intra-connection replay protection.
    Elwyn> Neither of the discussions above mention the phrases
    Elwyn> 'inter-connection' or 'intra-connection'.  For OSPFv3 this is
    Elwyn> implicit because 'no replay protection is provided'.  For
    Elwyn> OSPFv2 it would be desirable to explain how the problems
    Elwyn> outlined in s2.1 relate to these terms.

Actually, the discussion in section 1 of requirements to meet did
discuss both inter-connection and intra-connection replay, referring
back to the requirements draft.
Also, the discussion in section 2 already included an explicit mention
of what created an inter-connection vulnerability.
I added a reference to intra-connection replay in the appropriate part
of section 2.

[Gen-art] Gen-art last call review of draft-ietf-… Elwyn Davies
Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art last call review of draft-i… Sam Hartman