Review of draft-hardie-privsec-metadata-insertion-05

Stewart Bryant <stewart@g3ysx.org.uk> Sat, 28 January 2017 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart@g3ysx.org.uk>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3661312946C; Sat, 28 Jan 2017 02:13:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart@g3ysx.org.uk>
To: <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Review of draft-hardie-privsec-metadata-insertion-05
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.41.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148559843419.17936.4314684504467085961.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 02:13:54 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/QRpkQTOjM3nTeSEzIYqrIwDeki8>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, draft-hardie-privsec-metadata-insertion.all@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 10:13:54 -0000

Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-hardie-privsec-metadata-insertion-??
Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
Review Date: 2017-01-28
IETF LC End Date: 2017-02-21
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary: This is a well written document with a couple of nits. It
would be helpful to the reader interested in the concept, but
unfamiliar with DNS if there was some minor additional clarification
regarding  EDNS0.

Major issues: None

Minor issues:

RFC4301 is an unused reference. Is it missing from the text?

=====

   By negotiating an EDNS0
   option which allowed them to self-populate this data,.....

SB> Calling up EDNS0 (which really needs expanding) comes out of the
SB> blue and could use a reference and sentence of explanation
SB> at least for those not familiar with the detail of DNS.

Nits/editorial comments: 

[RFC7624] in the Abstract should be changed to RFC7624

=========

1.  Introduction
....
   exploited in the attacks document in [RFC7258] and the threats
s/document/documented/