Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-babel-dtls-05

[David Schinazi <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Dan. I've pushed a commit with your suggestions:
https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/8d6a6fc05ce4c621b38d2c7621c4157300380078

We'll upload -06 at the end of this round of comments.

David

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:41 AM Dan Romascanu <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Thanks for the quick reply.
>
> See in-line.
>
> regards,
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:29 PM David Schinazi <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello Dan, and thanks for your review. Comments inline.
>>
>> 1. In section 2.1:
>>>
>>> > The default port
>>>    for Babel over DTLS is registered with IANA as the "babel-dtls" port
>>>    (UDP port TBD, see Section 4), and the port exchanging unencrypted
>>>    Babel traffic is registered as the "babel" port (UDP port 6696).
>>>
>>> A reference would be desirable here.
>>>
>>
>> What reference do you have in mind? This paragraph already has a
>> reference to Section 4 (IANA Considerations).
>>
>
> the section in the Babel spec that defines the "babel" port (UDP port
> 6696, see ....)
>
>
>
>>
>>> 2. In section 2.4
>>>
>>> > Nodes MUST silently ignore any unprotected
>>>    packet sent over unicast.  When parsing an unprotected packet, a node
>>>    MUST silently ignore all TLVs that are not of type Hello.  Nodes MUST
>>>    also silently ignore any unprotected Hello with the Unicast flag set.
>>>
>>> Is the last sentence necessary? Is this case not covered by the
>>> statement in
>>> the first sentence?
>>>
>>
>> The Unicast flag is a bit in the Babel packet. This statement instructs
>> nodes
>> to ignore a Hello TLV which was received over multicast but has the
>> unicast flag set.
>>
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>>
>