[IPsec] draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-redirect-13.txt

Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi> Mon, 17 August 2009 11:43 UTC

Return-Path: <kivinen@iki.fi>
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 D46D83A6B8E for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 04:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.250, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6]
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 FKfj1mAZzRPI for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 04:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.kivinen.iki.fi (fireball.acr.fi [83.145.195.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58B228C114 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 04:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fireball.kivinen.iki.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.kivinen.iki.fi (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7HBhWn6017989 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:43:32 +0300 (EEST)
Received: (from kivinen@localhost) by fireball.kivinen.iki.fi (8.14.3/8.12.11) id n7HBhWiA021370; Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:43:32 +0300 (EEST)
X-Authentication-Warning: fireball.kivinen.iki.fi: kivinen set sender to kivinen@iki.fi using -f
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <19081.16996.45125.775911@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:43:32 +0300
From: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
To: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1
X-Edit-Time: 10 min
X-Total-Time: 9 min
Subject: [IPsec] draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-redirect-13.txt
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: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:43:29 -0000

I read through this document, and it seems to be mostly ok.

Only think that might require clarification is the section "11. IANA
Considerations".

It currently says that "A specification that extends this registry
MUST also mention which of the new values are valid in which
Notification payload.", but looking at the initial IANA table, that
does not give that information.

It would be much better if the initial table would be specified
correctly already in this document i.e give initial table as:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Registry:
      Value     Description                           Used In   Reference
      -------   -----------------------------------   -------   ---------
      1         IPv4 address of the new VPN gateway   R,RF      [RFCXXXX]
      2         IPv6 address of the new VPN gateway   R,RF      [RFCXXXX]
      3         FQDN of the new VPN gateway           R         [RFCXXXX]
      4-240     Unassigned                                      [RFCXXXX]
      241-255   Private Use                                     [RFCXXXX]

      R = REDIRECT notify
      RF = REDIRECTED_FROM notify
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This kind of method is already used in IANA registries, for example
IKEv2 Transform Type registry lists which values are used in IKE and
which are used in ESP/AH (http://www.iana.org/assignments/ikev2-parameters). 
-- 
kivinen@iki.fi