Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-olsrv2-tlv-extension-01

[Thomas Clausen <[e-mail]>]

Thank you, Tero, for your review. 

As the non-native English speaker among the authors, thank you for your catch on the is/are in the IANA section...I am afraid that I have to assume that the fault there lies with me....

Respectfully,

Thomas

On 10 Feb 2014, at 15:05, Tero Kivinen <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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 seems to fix some cases in the NHDP and OLSRv2 TLVs
> where the original document might have been considered saying that
> unknown values in the TLVs can be used as a reason to reject message.
> This document makes it clear how unknown values in the TLVs needs to
> be processed. This document also creates several IANA registries for
> the TLV values and changes couple of the TLV values from numbers to
> bitfields (the existing values were already allocated so that the
> numbers can be parsed as bitfield).
> 
> Security considerations section mentions that as this does not really
> change the current implementations, it more or less describes how new
> extensions should be processed with implementations it does not add
> any new security considerations. New extensions might of course add
> new security considerations but those should be addressed in the
> documents which make those extensions.
> 
> The document is ready with nits.
> 
> Some nits:
> 
> In the IANA considerations section the IANA is used both in singular
> and plural, i.e. it says both "IANA is requested" and "IANA are
> requested". This should be fixed to say "IANA is requested". 
> -- 
> [e-mail]