Hi Stephen, Thanks for reviewing the document.
I think there would be value in making the cause of certificate error explicit. Would the following change be acceptable? OLD: If the certificate in the parameter is not accepted, the registrar MUST reject the corresponding registrations with Failure Type [IANA TBD] (Invalid certificate). NEW: If the certificate in the parameter is not accepted, the registrar MUST reject the corresponding registrations with the appropriate Failure Type: [IANA TBD] (Bad certificate): The certificate is corrupt, contains invalid signatures, etc. [IANA TBD] (Unsupported certificate): The certificate is of an unsupported type. [IANA TBD] (Certificate expired): The certificate is no longer valid. [IANA TBD] (Certificate other): The certificate could not be validated for some unspecified reason. [IANA TBD] (Unknown CA): The issuing CA certificate could not be located or is not trusted. Please let us know. Best, --julien On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 7:01 AM, Stephen Farrell <[email protected]> wrote: > Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis-10: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-hip-rfc5203-bis/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCUSS: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 3.3 - This fails to distinguish between an invalid > certificate (e.g. bad signature, unknown signer) and one > that is valid, but is not acceptable for this purpose. I > don't get why that is ok for HIP, can you explain? If it > is ok, I think you need to say so. If it is not ok (as I'd > suspect) then you appear to need to change text or one more > new error code. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Section 7 - I'm fine that this doesn't repeat stuff > from 5203, but a sentence saying to go look there too > would maybe be good. (I'm not sure if that would fix > Alexey's discuss or not. If not, then ignore me and > just talk to him about his discuss.) > > _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec
