Re: [secdir] [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-20

[Kent Watsen <[e-mail]>]

Hi Valery,


>             Implementations SHOULD only use transport algorithms to those 
> 
>           s/transport algorithms/secure transport/
> 
> That substitution by itself seems to result in an incomplete sentence.  How about this:  
>  
>           "Implementations SHOULD only use secure transport algorithms meeting local policy.”
>  
>           I was trying to avoid using combination of words “transport algorithm”
>           just to make text more accurate (usually we have transport protocols,
>           which are implemented using some crypto algorithms, if we talk
>           about secure transports). So how about:
>  
>           Implementations SHOULD only use secure transport protocols meeting local policy.
>  
>           ?


Done.



> I removed the last sentence but did NOT add “a few words”, because the existing text already covers the “need to stay current” angle.  The current “last” paragraph reads:
>  
>             Implementations SHOULD only use secure transport algorithms 
>             meeting local policy.  A reasonable policy may, e.g., state that
>             only ciphersuites listed as "recommended" by the IETF be used.
> 
> Good?
>  
>           Works for me if you replace “algorithms” with “protocols” :-)
> 

Done (per above)

>           (I still think that referencing RFC 7525 would be helpful, but it’s up to you, it’s definitely not a big deal).
> 

Added.   Resulting diffs here: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-21.txt <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-21.txt>


>           Thank you,
>           Valery.
> 

No, thank you!  :)

K.