[sidr] Review of draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08
Matthew Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net> Mon, 06 March 2017 16:41 UTC
Return-Path: <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net>
X-Original-To: sidr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sidr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51881298A5; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 08:41:00 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Matthew Miller <linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net>
To: secdir@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.46.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148881846080.15058.7367435968376657921.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 08:41:00 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidr/RIol9loVhWJ_Cu74jcnc97Wg2lM>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, sidr@ietf.org
Subject: [sidr] Review of draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810-bis-08
X-BeenThere: sidr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: Secure Interdomain Routing <sidr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidr/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr>, <mailto:sidr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:41:01 -0000
Reviewer: Matthew Miller Review result: Has Nits [ re-posting old review to get it onto the mailing list archives; some bugs prevented it the first time ] 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. Document: Reviewer: Matthew A. Miller Review Date: 2017-02-14 IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-30 IESG Telechat date: 2017-02-16 Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard, but has a minor concern that should be addressed. This document describes a protocol for distributing RPKI information to routers from trusted caches. Major issues: NONE Minor issues: * In Section 5.1. "Fields of a PDU", for the Flags: definition, it states that: """ The remaining bits in the flags field are reserved for future use. In protocol version 1, they MUST be 0 on transmission and SHOULD be ignored on receipt. """ However, this seems backwards to me. Would it seem safer that the reserved flags "MUST be ignored on receipt". Nits/editorial comments: NONE
- [sidr] Review of draft-ietf-sidr-rpki-rtr-rfc6810… Matthew Miller