Re: [secdir] draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd-06

[Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <[e-mail]>]

Hi Donald,

Thanks for the comments. See below inline.

On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 23:42 -0400, Donald Eastlake 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.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
> these comments just like any other last call comments.
> 
> This document specifies how to delegate IPv6 prefixes to a Mobile
> Router in a Mobile Network.
> 
> It has a reasonably extensive Security Considerations section and
> appears to appropriately specify protective measures against plausible
> threats. In particular, when the Mobile Router is away from home, it
> mandates the use of IPsec a la MIPv6. Possibly someone more familiar
> with IPsec should look at the specified Security Policy Database and
> Security Association Database.
> 
> Trivia:
> 
> Section 3.1, page 5, "...currently used by the is about to expire..."
> ? perhaps "...by the Mobile Node..."

Thanks, it should say "by the Mobile Router".

> 
> "an Mobile" -> "a Mobile"

Right.

> 
> Various acronyms, such as BU, HoA, while usually explained when first
> used, are missing from Section 2. HoA is not explained at all. Even
> better would be to vastly reduce the overuse of acronyms throughout
> this document.

Agree. This has been pointed out by other reviewers and we'll improve
this.

Thanks again.

Kind Regards,

Carlos

> 
> Thanks,
> Donald

-- 
Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano     http://www.netcoms.net
GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA  4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67