[Gen-art] Gen-RTP LC review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-08

Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Mon, 21 December 2015 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7329A1ACD2B; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 JCUHJLuO_pu9; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x22b.google.com (mail-pf0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCDB31ACD2A; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o64so93899185pfb.3; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=+rbPSN2KNkQ4Kv9jbZSY8eRSHyLbdxfKV3gTjfFIpSI=; b=i2ZcrQmE/AhZ08EI/RZS1oCVhQiaGAghm7GVwEbb4Nj1YlTdMJBrFWyhO1etlwH4r8 1hB1/iUJgrHiLkUx1zOGUCqukpN68SNu0FBZFzoBRe/hVu2ZCZF622KX5vQLyUaZZSe0 uo3iwkz9WHjhWEddPOhuV4CRMqvc7E/LVkh1OPkG97+hLwU9r7oZuCST7iz+Bq8dWFUH Syl6bUiQwhROR1i+UolbAyeSUmPNK2a1dAWbs+BtC/E6G0qVBiRxdDbbjsIBtr7LDQho WI+yq4n/gtqywcmmdtHe3xylzbNsdPZYUpbjpe4NBO5/ntSHMktWd6dWYXVks+PmqYeV e2HQ==
X-Received: by 10.98.74.10 with SMTP id x10mr30284307pfa.163.1450730513471; Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.16.96.65] ([216.31.219.19]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 13sm29932746pft.5.2015.12.21.12.41.52 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:52 -0800 (PST)
To: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis.all@ietf.org
From: Jouni Korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5678640F.7070204@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:41:51 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/m6YV7czr_oj82Tpoh73-Pc3xJqU>
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-RTP LC review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5205-bis-08
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: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 20:41:58 -0000

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-hip-rfc5205-bis-08
Reviewer: Jouni Korhonen
Review Date:2015–12-21
IETF LC End Date: 2015–12-28
IESG Telechat date:

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a standard track RFC 
with small nits to be corrected.

Major issues: None.

Minor issues:

* The document seems to imply/assume that a DNS query has multiple 
question sections with different QTYPEs. At least the exmaples in lines 
226 and 278 make me read so. I wonder whether this is actually the 
intention. If not, reword/edit accordingly to avoid the confusion. This 
is to avoid known issues when QDCOUNT>1 or have a justification to do so.

* Section 5 and the assiciated HIP RR figure mostly mentions public key 
but not HI anymore. For the clarity I would suggest adding text that the 
public key is the HI as well.


Nits/editorial comments:

* IDnits complains on outdated reference: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis-06 
but this can be corrected e.g., by the RFC Editor.

* Line 97: s/address\(es\)/addresses

* Line 162: s/obtain/obtains

* Line 163: s/initiate/initiates

* The document sometime uses "initiator" instead of "Initiator" e.g., in 
line 173. Suggest always using "Initiator" when meaning the HIP Initiator.

* API is never expanded.

* Sentence between lines 204-206 is somewhat hard to parse. Suggest 
rewording.

* Line 201: "HIP node (R)" probably means Responder. Suggest actually 
stating that.