Russ - would you be willing to clear your DISCUSS and capture Joel's
new issues in a COMMENT?
- Ralph
On Jul 27, 2009, at 4:56 AM 7/27/09, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
This document is nearly ready for publication as an Informational RFC.
While my comments have been resolved, some minor issues
apparently crept in during the editing process.. These are small
enough that they can probably be dealt with in notes to the RFC
Editor if no other issues are found. However, they are sufficiently
ambiguous that they should not be left for rediscovery by the RFC
Editor.
Two individual sentences became truncated (Section 7, first
paragraph "was created." => "was." and section 8, third bullet "the
server."=>"the.")
Section 8 on the Sign exchange previously said that the information
was signed using the private key. Now it says that it is signed
using the public key. As I understand it, the signature is
generated with the private key to be verified with the public key.
I am not sure what the right words in the paragraph would be. (I
was happy with "private key" before since the signer used his own
private key.)
In the paragraph on the extension field parser length calculation,
with the text beginning:
"If greater than 22 an extension field is present. If the length
is .."
has two minor issues. I believe it would be clearer if it said
"If the remaining length is greater than 22 an extension field is
present. If the remaining length is ..."
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern
Russ Housley wrote:
Joel:
Please take a look at the updated document....
*Discuss (2009-06-15)
*
The Gen-ART Review by Joel Halpern on 5-June-2009 has
lead to some
discussion with the authors. Not all of the issues have
been
resolved, but it is clear that some changes to the document are
needed. The following issues are still unresolved.
The usage within Autokey of the extension field need description
early
in the document. Paragraph 3 of Section 10 reserves seven
values (1-7)
Autokey. The "Field Type" field performs two roles:
identification as
an Autokey extension and defining the type within Autokey.
Section 11.1 includes a 16 bit Digest / Signature NID. There
is no
description of how this is used.
The wording on hierarchy in section 5, paragraph 3 is the opposite
of
what is shown in the figure. (The figure matches
expectations, where
a client of one group operates as the TH of a group operating at
a
lower stratum.)
In Section 10, the paragraph that begins "[T]he extension
field parser initializes a pointer..." is incorrect. The
"length" by which the
pointer is increment is the length in the extension header, not
the
length computed by subtracting the NTP header from the packet
length.
In figure 5, it would help the reader if the groups and hosts had
different names. (Even just calling the groups Alice-Group
and
Carol-Group would help.)
In section 5, in the description of "[t]he steps in hiking
the certificate trails...", in step 1, in the second sentence,
please add
language to make it clear that the server is "exchanging host
names
and negotiating..." with is the server from whom it is
getting
information.
Section 8 should be moved earlier in the document. Early
parts of the
document assume an understanding of properties of the system
which
have not been described yet.
Section 11.6 (Security Considerations) is supposed to be a
top-level
section.
X-Original-To: hous...@vigilsec.com
Delivered-To: hous...@vigilsec.com
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 required=3.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
From: internet-dr...@ietf.org
To: ntp-cha...@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ntp-
auto...@tools.ietf.org,rdr...@cisco.com,hous...@vigilsec.com,tim.p...@nist.gov
,pasi.ero...@nokia.com,adrian.far...@huawei.com
Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-ntp-autokey-06.txt
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 05:00:02 -0700 (PDT)
New version (-06) has been submitted for draft-ietf-ntp-
autokey-06.txt. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ntp-autokey-06.txt
Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
Diff from previous version:
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ntp-autokey-06
IETF Secretariat.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
