[Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-6man-overlap-fragment-03.txt
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-6man-overlap-fragment-03.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2009-10-29 IETF LC End Date: 2009-11-02 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Personal comment as a IPv6 implementor: overlapping fragments have no utility in IPv6 so I never added code to support them. BTW the specs just didn't disallow them (at explained in the introduction but not in the Abstract) and most implementors didn't care. Some lazy copied the IPv4 code and removed the overlap support to get something simpler, some are so lazy they kept everything... But to explicitely disallow them is the right idea. BTW I remember an old paper about BRO (before the IDSs :-) where a fragmentation/segmentation overlap was found bad, so it is not new (i.e., it is older than IPv6...). Nits/editorial comments: - Abstract page 1: allows - does not disallow?? - Toc page 2: Acknowledgements - Acknowledgments - 2 page 3: the term 'check' is not enough because it is for protection, something like 'security check' should be better (but a bit too strong). - 3 page 5: it is possible to get bad overlapping fragments from an error too (i.e., it is not always an attack, of course the action should be to drop the whole packet anyway). - 4 page 6: received), MUST - received) MUST? - 6 page 6: Acknowledgements - Acknowledgments Thanks francis.dup...@fdupont.fr ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
Re: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-hokey-preauth-ps-09.txt
Hi, Thank for your taking time review. We will take care of your precious comments soon! Regards! -Qin - Original Message - From: Francis Dupont francis.dup...@fdupont.fr To: gen-art@ietf.org Cc: yo...@tari.toshiba.com; sunse...@huawei.com; g...@net-zen.net; tim.p...@nist.gov Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 11:14 PM Subject: review of draft-ietf-hokey-preauth-ps-09.txt I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-hokey-preauth-ps-09.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2009/10/29 IETF LC End Date: 2009/10/21 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: - Abstract page 2: Extensible Authentication Protocol - ... (EAP) - Introduction page 4: authentication and authorization - plural (this - these, requires - require) - 3.3.1 page 8: two forms:. ... - two forms: horizontal and vertical. (or: Horizontal and Vertical.) - 5 page 10: portion - part? - 5 page 10: there is no b in 2: 2(b) - 2? - 6 page 11: L2 - layer 2 (or IMHO better link layer). I suggest to keep L2 and co to figure and to expend them in the text. - 6.1 page 13 and 6.2 page 14: the same - 13.1 RFC 4962 is a BCP and is in the normative references? (just a question, I believe you've checked it is allowed). - 13.2 pages 19 and 20: some spurious spaces before commas. - 13.2 page 19: bad cut in URLs (\nhttp or htt\np...) - Authors' Addresses page 20: * +1 (732) 699-5365 - +1 732 699-5365 * US - USA I expected China in place of PRC but you should know the official name of your own country far better than me (:-). Regards francis.dup...@fdupont.fr ___ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
