Re: [Hipsec] WGLC: draft-ietf-hip-rfc5204-bis

Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Tue, 05 May 2015 14:02 UTC

Return-Path: <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.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 C83EE1ACF60 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2015 07:02:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 83rCOhjozKRQ for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 May 2015 07:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A03A1ACF16 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 May 2015 07:01:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f79b66d000001131-d8-5548cd411ba5
Received: from ESESSHC006.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 55.06.04401.14DC8455; Tue, 5 May 2015 16:01:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [131.160.36.183] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.38) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.210.2; Tue, 5 May 2015 16:01:36 +0200
Message-ID: <5548CD40.2040709@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 17:01:36 +0300
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Henderson <tomh@tomh.org>
References: <5530E4A8.70300@ericsson.com> <5547FA8B.9000907@tomh.org>
In-Reply-To: <5547FA8B.9000907@tomh.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvja7jWY9QgzVLJCymLprMbNF49w+T A5PHkiU/mTz2XNMIYIrisklJzcksSy3St0vgyjjasJOl4CtfxbrJH5gbGN9zdzFyckgImEh8 +tTCCGGLSVy4t56ti5GLQ0jgKKNEe8MkKGc1o8T9O10sIFW8AtoSUyffYwWxWQRUJHZPesAG YrMJWEhsuXUfrEZUIEpi4tdDUPWCEidnPgGzRQQUJS4d6gPrZRaQlFi+6RdQLweHsICZxOyZ iSBhIQFXiQVnzoGN5BTQkNj/ro8RotxA4siiOVCt8hLb385hhqjXllj+rIVlAqPgLCTbZiFp mYWkZQEj8ypG0eLU4qTcdCNjvdSizOTi4vw8vbzUkk2MwGA9uOW36g7Gy28cDzEKcDAq8fAq qHiECrEmlhVX5h5ilOZgURLntTM+FCIkkJ5YkpqdmlqQWhRfVJqTWnyIkYmDU6qB0fvLT+lu J6fbutf+iDDonVrlyv0pxHXv521BL94a6u/i+HX736a1x25oq8/iU7i6wPrzi6VR3bPfzE5f dMR/0+lM4QVrBeTkjm28v+2Ut2ehlrrYzk9JN5ZNtXh2K2sJV9XC3b7bZhvfzTd1/n6ivvBn waEFRVVLbI5XRk+vuJLLc+t4Bv+q3itKLMUZiYZazEXFiQDAPfbhNwIAAA==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/v758kXS0Xy0Z6_niZ_gqoi6vsZI>
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: Tue, 05 May 2015 14:02:10 -0000

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