[IPsec] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-09
"McCann Peter-A001034" <pete.mccann@motorola.com> Thu, 29 October 2009 18:53 UTC
Return-Path: <pete.mccann@motorola.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12D73A6A13; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:53:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GBdvugWOUpwZ; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail119.messagelabs.com (mail119.messagelabs.com [216.82.241.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9E03A6A09; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: pete.mccann@motorola.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-119.messagelabs.com!1256842418!37217972!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.1.3; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [136.182.1.13]
Received: (qmail 27605 invoked from network); 29 Oct 2009 18:53:39 -0000
Received: from motgate3.mot.com (HELO motgate3.mot.com) (136.182.1.13) by server-10.tower-119.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 29 Oct 2009 18:53:39 -0000
Received: from il27exr03.cig.mot.com (il27exr03.mot.com [10.17.196.72]) by motgate3.mot.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n9TIrXrp023526; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:53:38 -0700 (MST)
Received: from az10vts04.mot.com (il27vts04.cig.mot.com [10.17.196.88]) by il27exr03.cig.mot.com (8.13.1/Vontu) with SMTP id n9TIrX9d015784; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:33 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from de01exm70.ds.mot.com (de01exm70.am.mot.com [10.176.8.26]) by il27exr03.cig.mot.com (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id n9TIrXiu015778; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:53:33 -0500 (CDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:53:10 -0400
Message-ID: <274D46DDEB9F2244B2F1EA66B3FF54BC05C581C6@de01exm70.ds.mot.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-09
thread-index: AcpYyQ9lC3cgrSnQQZ2X8GGVnooQjg==
From: McCann Peter-A001034 <pete.mccann@motorola.com>
To: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility.all@tools.ietf.org
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:25:35 -0700
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: [IPsec] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-09
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:53:25 -0000
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html> ). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-ipsecme-traffic-visibility-09 Reviewer: Pete McCann Review Date: 2009-10-29 IETF LC End Date: 2009-10-28 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: One minor issue to discuss Major issues: none Minor issues: Section 2: As can be seen, the WESP format extends the standard ESP header by the first 4 octets for IPv4 and by 8 octets for IPv6. The WESP header is integrity protected, along with all the fields specified for ESP in RFC 4303. Normally ESP wouldn't need to process encapsulation headers that appear prior to the SPI. Won't this require modification of the ESP implementation, possibly breaking its modularity? Would it be problematic for certain algorithms to include this data? It might be good to state that. Nits/editorial comments: none
- [IPsec] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-traf… McCann Peter-A001034