Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis
Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Tue, 08 April 2014 13:46 UTC
Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EC11A03D9 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.273
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.273 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] 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 o9JTAS855J2W for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [IPv6:2607:f4b8:3:0:218:71ff:fe83:66b9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8947E1A0330 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 06:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D29062A8C; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 13:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8xepO1vIXCi1; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:46:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (lx120e2.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CEA562A62; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:46:18 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <5343FDAA.3060404@htt-consult.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 09:46:18 -0400
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Miika Komu <mkomu@cs.hut.fi>, hipsec@ietf.org
References: <532AD28B.4010204@ericsson.com> <C018CAF7B620E64D87620E581C4E6BB905536DEC@XCH-BLV-104.nw.nos.boeing.com> <5343CE8D.3020506@ericsson.com> <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi>
In-Reply-To: <5343CF09.9030205@cs.hut.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/UJV-nMiufYpFbvtHMdA9P-42rPs
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 13:46:43 -0000
On 04/08/2014 06:27 AM, Miika Komu wrote: > Hi, > > sure thing, thanks Tom for comments! ONe pass through them and they all look ok. > > On 04/08/2014 01:25 PM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >> Hi Tom, >> >> thanks for your comments. Authors, could you please look into this? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> On 07/04/2014 12:08 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> we WGLCed this draft some time ago, but we are WGLCing it again at >>>> this >>>> point to make sure people are happy with the current version: >>>> >>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis/ >>>> >>>> This WGLC will end on April 6th. Please, send your comments to this >>>> list before then. >>>> >>> >>> I read the revised version again today and believe it is ready to >>> publish once the below nits are taken care of. I believe that they >>> are mostly editorial but I'd be happy to discuss on the list. >>> >>> - Tom >>> >>> Section 1 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> There is exactly one Host Identifier for each Host Identity >>> (although there may be transient periods of time such as key >>> replacement when more than one identifier may be active). >>> >>> The reference to Section 7 should be to Section 6. >>> >>> The first use of ESP should be cited (it is later cited in 6.1). >>> >>> Section 2 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> Public is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from known to peers | >>> | | only to known to the World. | >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> >>> Public is | >>> | | a relative term here, ranging from "known to | >>> | | peers only" to "known to the world." | >>> >>> Again, the reference to HIP base exchange should be Section 6, not >>> Section 7 >>> >>> Section 3 >>> ----------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that it can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> o The names should have a localized abstraction so that they can be >>> used in existing protocols and APIs. >>> >>> Section 4 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them for man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> a public-key-based HI can >>> authenticate the HIP packets and protect them from man-in-the-middle >>> attacks. >>> >>> s/HIP BEX/HIP base exchange >>> >>> Section 4.2 >>> ----------- >>> s/through out/throughout >>> >>> Section 4.3 >>> ----------- >>> s/HIts/HITs >>> >>> Section 4.5 >>> ----------- >>> s/types of application/types of applications >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> For instance, >>> Light-weight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or in a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis]. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> For instance, a directory based on the >>> Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) or a Public Key >>> Infrastructure (PKI) [I-D.ietf-hip-rfc6253-bis] may be used. >>> >>> s/associate with/associated with >>> >>> s/a LDAP or DHT/an LDAP-based directory or DHT >>> >>> Section 5 >>> --------- >>> >>> Old text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of routing direction >>> vectors and interface names. >>> >>> New text: >>> >>> As discussed above, the IP >>> addresses can be seen to be a confounding of computing platform >>> names and interface names. >>> >>> (or else delete this sentence as it is somewhat redundant with other >>> sentences below; I just felt that the "confounding" aspect relates >>> to EIDs and locators instead of routing direction vectors) >>> >>> Section 8 >>> --------- >>> s/cannot distinguished/cannot be distinguished >>> >>> Section 9 >>> --------- >>> s/intestigating/investigating >>> >>> s/Particularly, so called bloom filters/In particular, so-called >>> Bloom filters >>> >>> (also in section 12.3, 'Bloom' is not capitalized; it should be >>> either be capitalized everywhere (typical usage that I have seen) or >>> lower case everywhere) >>> >>> s/datastructures/data structures >>> >>> s/by HIP working group/by the HIP working group >>> >>> Section 10 >>> ---------- >>> s/in a similar vain/similar to how >>> >>> Old text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy of >>> initiator HIT to responder HIT. >>> >>> New text: >>> The implementations should provide for a policy mapping of >>> initiator HITs to responder HITs. >>> >>> Section 11 >>> ---------- >>> s/With the exception High-Performance/With the exception of >>> High-Performance >>> >>> s/As majority of the/As the majority of the >>> >>> s/More agile IPv6 interoperability as discussed in Section 4.4./More >>> agile IPv6 interoperability can be achieved, as discussed in Section >>> 4.4. >>> >>> s/An addition, the underlying/Additionally, the underlying >>> >>> s/halves the size of access control lists/can potentially halve the >>> size of access control lists >>> >>> the reference [scultz-intermittent] should probably be spelled >>> [schuetz-intermittent] >>> >>> Section 11.3 >>> ------------ >>> s/accomodate/accommodate >>> >>> s/strictly speaking mandatory/mandatory >>> >>> Section 12.2 >>> ------------ >>> s/credit-based authorization approach Host Mobility/credit-based >>> authorization approach for host mobility >>> >>> Section 12.3 >>> ------------- >>> s/There has been attempts/There have been attempts >>> >>> s/the protection of malign data flows/?? >>> >>> s/which the the end-hosts/which the end-hosts >>> >>> Section 15 >>> ---------- >>> s/RFC 4424/RFC 4423 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Hipsec mailing list >> Hipsec@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >> > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >
- [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Henderson, Thomas R
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Miika Komu
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Robert Moskowitz
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis Miika Komu