Re: [nbs] I-D Action:draft-ubillos-name-based-sockets-03.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

A few comments on the draft:


>    Once the name exchange has been performed successfully the complete
>    feature set will be made available to the communication
>    automatically.

That sentence makes me feel very hungry. What are those features
and where are they discussed?

> 4.1.  Name format
> 
>    Names can be provided in any of three ways.
> 
>    o  FQDN.  The Fully Qualified Domain Name of the host.  This will
>       allow e.g.  DNSsec to provide authenticity of the name.

Actually, doesn't DNSSEC prove authenticity of the name==address(es)
equivalence? The name itself is just a character string.

> 
>    o  ip6.arpa.  Using one of the hosts interfaces addresses as a name.

Why would I want to use this?

> 
>    o  Nonce.  A one-use only session identifier.

That really needs a lot more explanation.

In general the draft can't stand alone; it needs an NBS
architecture document to go with. I'm sure that can be built
out of Christian's existing document.

> 6.  Security Considerations

Maybe it doesn't belong here, but we need a threat analysis,
so that we can figure what the security issues are, and
to what extent DNSSEC solves them.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter