I am looking at this draft in order to fill in my recommendations for tonight’s
IESG telechat.
Ben, thank you for your review which pointed out worries (and I agreed with
those), and thank you Kevin for the responses (which made sense to me).
However, in addition to the major/minor issue
Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-14
I am looking at this draft in order to fill in my recommendations for tonight's
IESG telechat.
Ben, thank you for your review which pointed out worries (and I agreed with
those), and thank you Kevin for the responses (which made sense to me
Kevin:
This is probably my fault. I didn't think it was wise to submit a
new version of the I-D until all of the comments corrections had
been collected. I didn't want folks trying to review a moving target,
especially since a change in paragraph A might affect the interpretation
of
M.
Cc: draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm@tools.ietf.org; gen-art@ietf.org Team
(gen-art@ietf.org); IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: Gen-ART LC Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-aes-gcm-14
Hi, thanks for the response. Further comments inline. I will remove sections
that do not appear to need further
Hi Kevin,
For the record, based on your comments I now consider the SSRC text to be a
minor issue rather than a major one.
Comments inline (again, deleting parts that seem closed)
On Sep 18, 2014, at 10:30 AM, Igoe, Kevin M. kmi...@nsa.gov wrote:
[...]
Does the source in each source
Ben et al:
Here is the reasoning behind some of the issues you raise. At least one
of them (SSRC re-use) is security critical.
=
SSRC Management:
If I read this section correctly, the draft requires central management
