Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-tram-stun-pmtud

[Gonzalo Camarillo <[e-mail]>]

Authors,

could you please respond to Carl's comments below? Thanks!

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On 11/09/2018 3:43 PM, Carl Wallace 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 describes a Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) usage
> for Path MTU Discovery (PMTUD) between a client and a server.
> 
> A few comments (bearing in mind I am not versed in STUN specs):
> 
> - It may be worth highlighting the requirement for authentication when
> providing an overview of the Complete Probing mechanism in section 2.
> - In section 4, replace "Simple Probing mechanism does not require
> authentication" with "Simple Probing mechanism does not require
> authentication except where used as an implicit signaling mechanism".
> - Complete Probing and some uses of Simple Probing require authentication.
> Are there any authentication mechanisms that must be supported?
> - The second paragraph of the introduction and first paragraph of section
> 5 open the use of the spec to non-STUN-based protocols may not square with
> all of the MUSTs in the document, some of which require STUN (like section
> 4.1.x). 
> - Why is 5780 marked as informative? Attributes from it are required.
> 
>