RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth-03

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Fri, 22 April 2011 19:26 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; b=kmGEVVlLLgevbg5C0agQcH/PzE3dVZgFjYAVkUKJ5mh4kxXqpTszOp4+ynGAs6udLX 5q+Gstgai09VEpw+cgFUyLJBkIhkLJ3j5lKUEvEq04M54hpfFZDP+t3VGXL5MHC+408J RarxmZlFyP3WUMwNXO4IfJWFIYmv77+qFfL9I=
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: 'Dan Harkins' <dharkins@lounge.org>
References: <4da2f037.cf03d90a.5d44.fffff941@mx.google.com> <9a944e460983182912fe0d2e85ef32f9.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
In-Reply-To: <9a944e460983182912fe0d2e85ef32f9.squirrel@www.trepanning.net>
Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth-03
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 22:25:00 +0300
Message-ID: <4db1d650.04b4e30a.337e.ffffa569@mx.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: AcwAhbL1u1YBRenYQua/hFaSx2z3KwAnCDZg
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, 'IETF-Discussion list' <ietf@ietf.org>, draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth.all@tools.ietf.org
Precedence: list

Hi Dan,
About my first  comment what I meant that section 6 say "   For the purposes
of interoperability, a password pre-processing technique of "None" MUST be
supported.". I now understand that in section 8.5 and 8.6 you say that the
initiator may decide not to use the "none" technique and therefore may not
find an interoperable mode. 
If the initiator will use "none" technique than you will have
interoperability. 
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Harkins [mailto:dharkins@lounge.org]
> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 3:39 AM
> To: Roni Even
> Cc: draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth.all@tools.ietf.org; gen-
> art@ietf.org; 'IETF-Discussion list'
> Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-auth-03
> 
> 
>   Hi Roni,
> 
>   Thank you for reviewing my draft. Comments inline....
> 
> On Mon, April 11, 2011 5:11 am, Roni Even wrote:
> > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> > Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
> > <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> >
> > Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you
> > may receive.
> >
> > Minor issues:
> >
> > 1.	In section 8.5 and 8.6 the draft says that "If no more password
> > pre-processing techniques are supported the exchange MUST be
> > terminated."
> > Reading section 6, I thought that NONE MUST be supported for
> > interoperability purpose.
> 
>   One of the valid techniques for password pre-processing is "none".
> That doesn't mean that there isn't a technique, it means the technique
> is to perform no pre-processing on the password (treat it as a raw
> blob of bits).
> 
> > 2.	In section 8.1 and in figure 1 and figure 2 is there a maximum
> value
> > for "counter"?
> 
>   No there isn't, but it is doubtful the number will get very large.
> The probability that more than n iterations is necessary will be
> roughly (1-(r/2p))^n, where r is the order and p is the prime, and
> that number rapidly approaches zero as n increases.
> 
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> >
> > 1.       In section 1 just before 1.1 you have "suceed" instead of
> > "succeed"
> >
> > 2.       In section 4 third bullet "an" instead of "and"
> >
> > 3.       In section 4.2 "Two elementx" instead of "Two elements"
> >
> > 4.       In section 5 second row "authenticaiton" should be
> > "authentication"
> >
> > 5.       In section 6 fourth row "identitcal" instead of "identical"
> 
>   Thank you for catching all of these.
> 
>   regards,
> 
>   Dan.

Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-spsk-a… Roni Even
Re: Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-sp… Dan Harkins
RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-harkins-ipsecme-sp… Roni Even