Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-07: 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-ipsecme-implicit-iv/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for the work put into this document. I am trusting the security AD to check whether it is safe not to have a 'random' IV. I have one trivial-to-fix DISCUSS and a couple of COMMENTs. It is also unclear at first sight whether the 'nonce' built from the sequence number is actually the IIV. Regards, -éric == DISCUSS == -- Section 1 -- D.1) Please use the RFC 8174 template ;) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- == COMMENTS == -- Section 5 -- C.1) "inside the SA Payload" probably worth being a little more descriptive here (for instance, "SA payload in the IKE exchange" ?). Also suggest to use "IKE Initiator Behavior" for the section title. -- Section 8 -- C.2) please use the usual text for IANA considerations (notably asking IANA to register as this is not this document that registers the codes). == NITS == In several places, s/8 byte nonce/8-byte nonce/ _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
