Hello,
I've read draft-ietf-csi-sndp-prob-01.txt. I think the document is in a
good shape. Still I have some small questions and comments.
- Figure 3, the box isn't drawn correctly (misaligned dashes)
- section 3.3:
Concerning the DAD issue on ND proxy, I think there might be a problem
too when there is a real collision. The node defending its address will
send a NA that might go thought the proxy. The proxy may not be
authorized to modify this NA if it is protected by SEND.
Does this make sense ? Or will this case never happen ?
- section 4.2.5: s/are are/are/
- section 4.2.6:
Movement between segments could be controlled with increasing
certificate sequence numbers and timestamps. The timestamp of the
root authority (in this case, the CGA address owner) would be most
significant. Where ties exist, the shortest chain would supercede,
as this would indicate a proxy closer to the proxied node.
I don't understand the first sentence. Can you detail ? (Are you referring to
serial numbers ?)
Regards,
Tony Cheneau
_______________________________________________
CGA-EXT mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext
