IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-10

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Mon, 10 April 2023 21:32 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 AB41EC14CE53; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 14:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.094
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.094 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id snRceDo20ge6; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 14:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB6C1C14CE47; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 14:32:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PwMd52QtRz71d; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:32:25 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1681162345; bh=ZRJXXttYWxGdunbuag7t3HFzx9xPRYrbgYh+9+G8zZ0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=JmQdOHPbzX/7l7drx7ygRDnXYmYbfi6ZIE9HrC9mv8sraZW+kBjv8GsQqjSxDREdC TQdR53LFEZOYNsnC/OQrXAEq3E3OshbWQjEs9L+PH1Mrlk1v9X+XDvg2Pmm7ly8z+0 Z3hlW7wDTelaVPyAXbaCziAsZqZWIGhQX1rkUmo4=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d_670w1b-WZr; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:32:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [193.110.157.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:32:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 93A7381AE06; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 17:32:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90EED81AE05; Mon, 10 Apr 2023 17:32:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2023 17:32:23 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec.all@ietf.org, "ipsec@ietf.org WG" <ipsec@ietf.org>, last-call@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <168115302430.32336.7010056407732824949@ietfa.amsl.com>
Message-ID: <f518ba03-73ad-e4d5-7402-e6925c838310@nohats.ca>
References: <168115302430.32336.7010056407732824949@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/uVXLg5rCZStdnzgihA1zq5SZsfo>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-10
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 10 Apr 2023 21:32:32 -0000

On Mon, 10 Apr 2023, Ines Robles via Datatracker wrote:

> The document is well written and easy to read.

Thanks :)

> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Section 3.2: "198.51.0/24" --> "198.51.100.0/24" ?

Fixed in -11.

> Question: Section 2.1, the Security Label should be at least of one octet. Is
> there a limit of octets for this field?

There is no limit other than the limitations of packet sizes in IKE. And
even there, we have some drafts currently looking at changing that, so I
think it is best not to mention anything about maximums in this draft.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email