Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis
Julien Laganier <julien.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 06 May 2015 00:03 UTC
Return-Path: <julien.ietf@gmail.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 318971B2AB4 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2015 17:03:18 -0700 (PDT)
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 cW8wnoNdsmAY for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2015 17:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x235.google.com (mail-yk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::235]) (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 CA8081B2AA2 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2015 17:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ykft189 with SMTP id t189so47431136ykf.1 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 May 2015 17:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=2rSje0t7PTrxEgB50OmmX092XC57SeAvuUpvnCbVR14=; b=oY0VFWWvwpyacVYu0H3rTCpNumxBRh69F/jjEkb8oq94KpxAWtgBLHR0uRzPzrmE51 NmX7qKvtD8PzhjJPkIEquU48mV9f4GNTyJY6QNXv261CEzRCks+VDBXifetuoRRO2CEw +yWx2kJT6JPMfkvLqu2lW7Pj8V5yBiKOldDuijH0f80f7qwf9MVRXSqLM+FOxFBkwFsb vtE3+robT7S4kRuISfct3KX5/wAXGCg5LdmGTe0Fbwafz7Z7Pb9OtRCiVZvcjD8YvqAM GCgMxDevnm+osI7OaA2IyEhIYtbvBrZEEzaQNClcKssYcxlYBhJTWOLGA0qPBTPAYlTl nu2A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.170.218.86 with SMTP id k83mr26561282ykf.6.1430870568198; Tue, 05 May 2015 17:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.129.137.134 with HTTP; Tue, 5 May 2015 17:02:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5548CD40.2040709@ericsson.com>
References: <5530E4A8.70300@ericsson.com> <5547FA8B.9000907@tomh.org> <5548CD40.2040709@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 17:02:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE_dhju=+ViW5Ltm=On+RWEV3pLwUrw4b5b_wYfeP-qaMXOO-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julien Laganier <julien.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/jT47S5lp2gUfStA3bnH6XIBBUaU>
Cc: HIP <hipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-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: Wed, 06 May 2015 00:03:18 -0000
Thanks for the review Tom, we will address your WGLC comments ASAP. --julien On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 7:01 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> wrote: > Thanks for this review as well, Tom. > > Julien, Lars, could you please address Tom's comments in a new revision > of the draft? > > Thanks, > > Gonzalo > > On 05/05/2015 2:02 AM, Tom Henderson wrote: >> On 04/17/2015 03:47 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to start a WGLC on the following draft. This WGLC will end >>> on May 4th: >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis/ >>> >>> Please, send your comments to this list. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Gonzalo >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Hipsec mailing list >>> Hipsec@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >>> >> >> Here are a few questions/comments on this draft. >> >> Technical >> --------- >> Section 4.3.3 (including VIA_RVS) seems to conflict with 4.2.3 (VIA_RVS >> parameter definition). Section 4.3.3 states that VIA_RVS is mandatory >> if the I1 arrived via a RVS, but 4.2.3 says that the responder MAY >> choose to send it for debugging purposes. >> >> Another point regarding Section 4.2.3: it states that the responder may >> include "a subset of the IP addresses of its RVSs in some of the >> packets." What use cases are there for including more than a single RVS >> address (the one that was used)? Would more than one RVS ever need to >> be traversed between initiator and responder? I don't think the draft >> supports such security relationships, so perhaps it would be best to >> explicitly say it is out of scope. >> >> Editorial >> ---------- >> Section 6 (IANA) needs to be updated to request the new action items of >> IANA, not the ones previously asked when 5204 was published. >> Accordingly, IANA is not assigning new Parameter Types but instead this >> draft should request that IANA update the reference for these three >> types from 5204 to this document. The same holds for the Registration >> Type value. >> >> - Tom > > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
- [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis Julien Laganier
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis Julien Laganier