Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Tom: thanks again for good catches! All comments are fixed in 08 version.

Gonzalo: I think we're good to go for the last call.

On 04/08/2014 01:27 PM, Miika Komu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sure thing, thanks Tom for comments!
>
> 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
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hipsec mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
>