[Ntp] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps-07

Liang Xia via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 20 February 2020 09:25 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F14C2120867; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 01:25:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Liang Xia via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, ntp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.118.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Liang Xia <frank.xialiang@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <158219074887.12472.2580172227467394593@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 01:25:48 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/3ZqKRFuTc9r5a_ZueD2lH0odXRY>
Subject: [Ntp] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps-07
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 09:25:49 -0000

Reviewer: Liang Xia
Review result: Ready

Reviewer: Liang Xia
Review result: Ready

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's  ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the  IESG.  These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the  security area
directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

This document specifies guidelines for
defining packet timestamp formats in networking protocols at various
layers. It also presents three recommended timestamp formats.

This document is well written, and the security considerations section discusses the
potential security issues comprehensively, I don't see any other issues missed. 

In summary, I think this document is ready to go.