Re: [secdir] Fwd: secdir review of draft-ietf-hip-native-nat-traversal

[Miika Komu <[e-mail]>]

Hi Carl,

(apologies for the delay in the response)

> 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 a new Network Address Translator (NAT) traversal
> mode for the Host Identity Protocol (HIP). While I am not a HIP guy, it
> seems ready for publication. It's well-written and the security
> considerations section is thorough.

thanks!

> The only bit that raised a question
> was in section 4, which states "it should be noted that HIP version 2
> [RFC7401<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7401>] instead of HIPv1 is
> expected to be used with this NAT traversal mode". Earlier in the
> document, it states the draft is based on HIPv2. Are there any
> considerations worth noting in the cases where HIPv1 is used or should
> section 4 be revised to require v2?

there's nothing HIPv1/v2 specific in the draft really. It's more about 
that the HIPv1 is obsoleted by HIPv2 RFC. Nevertheless, I can encourage 
to stick to the latest specification by changing the text a bit:

Original: Also, it should be noted that HIP version 2 [RFC7401] instead 
of HIPv1 is expected to be used with this NAT traversal mode.

New: Also, it should be noted that HIP version 2 [RFC7401] MUST be used 
instead of HIPv1 with this NAT traversal mode.

Does this address your concern?