IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req-04.txt

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 02 June 2016 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 E432F12D704 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 06:24:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SZfyC3Pspa7Z for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 06:24:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E906F12D709 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 06:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 411BF2CC6F; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:24:29 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SjibRr8Bgef1; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:24:28 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9709B2CC64; Thu, 2 Jun 2016 16:24:28 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4E34C008-1BF8-4104-AB01-413E034A9253"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.2
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37F96BF6@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 16:24:28 +0300
Message-Id: <344ECC01-3D92-4A5F-9106-7E5056C34920@piuha.net>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B37F96BF6@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/N_Hc1ubFn5IiS05_CE0WGTIcLOc>
Cc: "draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req.all@tools.ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req-04.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 13:24:34 -0000

Thanks for your review, and good questions, Christer. Authors, I have not seen a response or a new version. What’s up?

Jari

On 07 May 2016, at 17:48, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.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>
> 
> Document:                                     draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req-04
> Reviewer:                                        Christer Holmberg
> Review Date:                                7 May 2016
> IETF LC End Date:                        12 April 2016
> IETF Telechat Date:                    N/A
> Summary:                                      The document is well written, and almost ready for publication is informational RFC. However, I have a few editorial issues, related to the Introduction, that I ask the authors to address.
> Major Issues:                                None
> Minor Issues:                                None
> Editorial Issues:
> 
> Q_ABSTRACT_1:
> 
> The text says that the draft “discusses” requirements. In my opinion it should say “defines” or “specifies”.
> 
> 
> Q_INTRODUCTION_1:
> 
> Please add references for TLS (for TCP) and DTLS (for SCTP).
> 
> 
> Q_INTRODUCTION_2:
> 
> The text says: “…or alternative security mechanisms independent of Diameter (e.g., IPsec) is used.”
> 
> 2A: I guess it should be “are used”?
> 
> 2B: I am not sure I understand what “independent of Diameter” means.
> 
> 
> Q_INTRODUCTION_3:
> 
> The text talks about security between non-neighbour nodes, while the draft name includes “e2e”. However, when reading Section 4, non-neighbour does not necessarily mean end-to-end. I think it would be good to explicitly clarify that in the Introduction.
> 
> 
> Q_INTRODUCTION_4:
> 
> The text says: “This document collects requirements for developing a solution to protect Diameter AVPs.”
> 
> 2A: It needs to be clear that it’s about protecting AVPs between non-neighbour nodes.
> 
> 2B: Instead of “collect”, please use the same terminology as in the Abstract.
> 
> 
> Q_INTRODUCTION_5:
> 
>               Please enhance AVP on first occurrence. Currently it’s not done until Section 3.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email