[sipcore] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam-04

Rich Salz via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 20 January 2020 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4281209E6; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:19:26 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Rich Salz via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, sipcore@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.116.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Rich Salz <rsalz@akamai.com>
Message-ID: <157954076633.1692.4566366506529807317@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:19:26 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/QAthJKPEngfhsVtFZSnixQXQe7Y>
Subject: [sipcore] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam-04
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sipcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:19:26 -0000

Reviewer: Rich Salz
Review result: Has Nits

This is the security directorate (secdir) review for the sipcore-locparam
draft. Secdir tries to review all documents. The primary intended recipient of
this review if the security AD's; all others should consider this to be like
any other last-call review.

Summary: ready with nits.

End of Sec 1 has a quote-based typo.

In Sec 3, "This document does not comment..." paragraph is a beautiful
acceptance of reality.

In Sec 6, do proxies normally add themselves to the Record-Route field?  If so,
that might be worth mentioning explicitly.

In Sec 7, looks good.  A couple of typo's "multiple*S* locations" and
"hop-<SPACE>by-hop" and "an<SPACE>other domain."