Hi, At first sorry for the late reply and thanks for your review.
2008/12/18 Michaela Vanderveen <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I have reviewed this draft and have the following comments: > > Other reviewers think that the draft is reaching too far into the solution > space, for a problem statement. I find the level of solution hints to be > acceptable. In any case it seems that maybe it's a bit late for a WGLC? BTW, that was something asked by people from the WG :) > > It would be nice if the text below Fig. 5 actually referred to nodes M and N > and their locations, to illustrate the issues therein in a more concrete > fashion. Ditto goes for Fig. 6. OK. > > Section 2.3: The last part of the sentence "but may be matched with Neighbor > solicitation and advertisement services using the proxy's source > address in the same way as Mobile IPv6 [RFC4389] [RFC3775]" > is not clear; more text about how Mobile IPv6 does matching of what to what. All is normally described in section 2.1 but I can add a reference to this section :) > > Section 4.3: Not sure why we worry about the case when a node leaves the > link before it completes DAD, so it does not really have an address. Is this > any more common than the case of mobiles moving so fast that they can't > complete a handshake registration? E.g., MIPv6 bootstrapping where the HA has to perform a DAD for the HoA before to assign it. > > Section 8.3, first paragraph: why is accurate timekeeping required for > certificates? Certificates should be longer-term, unlike binding messages, > say, which need timestamps for anti-replay. Yes and no :) Depends whether a certificate based authorization of ND proxy is short-term as a CGA or not ... I must admit this is unclear for me for the moment :s > > Some editorials below: > > Abstract: First sentence needs rephrasing (at least replace "no" by "not") OK. Thanks. > > Section 2.2.: * "This is case" -> "This is the case" > * "this latest assigns it" -> "the latter assigns such an > address" > * "to be able to intercept messages, sent to the node, to tunnel > them to this latest" -> "to be able to intercept and tunnel messages to the > node". > OK. Thanks. > Section 3: "These advertisements must therefore have enough authority to > override Neighbor cache entries even though they are secured." -> > " These advertisements must therefore have enough authority to > override secured Neighbor cache entries." (not clear which are secured, the > advertisements or the cache entries). > OK. Thanks. > Section 4.1: Reference to CGA is not [3971] but [3972]. OK. Thanks > > Section 4.2: "and infers support for CGA verification. > Clarification or changing of this issue for non-CGA operations may be > necessary." -> > "and allows for CGA verification. > Updating of the signature function to support non-CGA operations may be > necessary." (or something along these lines) > OK. Thanks. > Section 5.1.2. " This certificate would need to be passed near to binding > time" - clarify: passed to whom, and what does "near" mean, shortly before > or shortly after binding update time instance? > OK. > Section 5.1.3: The sentence starting with "This is the case..." is too long > and needs to be split into two for clarity (e.g. at the "but to check..")). > OK. > Section 5.1.4: * "the HA no more needs to" -> "the HA no longer needs to" > * "this results to use a virtual" -> "this results in a virtual" > OK. > Section 5.2.2: * "Routers advertising on networks without routers" sounds > strange. Rephrase? > OK (cf. previous reply to another review). > * "Any device can set up to be" -> "Any device can set out to be" > OK. > Section 5.2.6: * "supercede" -> "supersede". > * "and may wish two network segments to appear to be > connected" -> " and may want to make two network segments appear to be > connected" > OK. > Section 6: "defending a same" -> "defending the same" > "a same PMIP " -> "the same PMIP" > OK. Thanks. Best regards and happy new year. JMC. > Regards, > Michaela > > > > _______________________________________________ CGA-EXT mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext
