Re: [sidr] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-06

[Di Ma <[e-mail]>]

Daniel,

Thanks for your review.

Please see my responses in lines.


> 在 2018年2月20日，23:00，Daniel Migault <[e-mail]> 写道：
> 
> Reviewer: Daniel Migault
> Review result: Has Nits
> 
> Hi, 
> 
> 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.
> 
> The summary of the review is Ready with nits:
> 
> •	section 1: Introduction
> 
>   However, an RPKI relying party may want to override some of the
>   information expressed via putative TAs and the certificates
> 
> <mglt>It seems that TA is being used for the first time here. The acronym
> should be extended to ease the reading of the document. I am reading it 
> as Trust Anchor.</mglt>
> 

Yes. We will use Trust Anchor for its first use. 

> 
> •	section 2.  RPKI RPs with SLURM
> 
>   SLURM provides a simple way to enable RPs to establish a local,
> 
> <mglt>It seems to me the acronym RP is used for the first time. It seems that 
> it should be expanded to ease the reading of the document. I am reading it 
> as Relaying Party.</mglt>

Yes. We will use Relaying Party for its first use. 

> 
> 
> •	section 6 Security considerations
> 
> <mglt>I My reading is that the section catches the criticality of the SLURM 
> files and that network operators are already familiar provisioning critical 
> data. As such I believe the section is sufficiently clear.</mglt>
> 
> •	whole document:
> 
> <mglt>It seems that BGPSec, and BGPsec are used together. I believe this 
> should be harmonized to BGPsec.</mglt>

We will use BGPsec throughout this document as used by RFC 8205. 

Di