Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-24
review-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-24-secdir-lc-leiba-2021-06-15-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-24
Requested revision 24 (document currently at 40)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2021-06-22
Requested 2021-06-08
Requested by Mahesh Jethanandani
Authors Kent Watsen
I-D last updated 2021-06-15
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -37 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -38 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -36 by Qin Wu (diff)
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -03 by Andy Bierman (diff)
Yangdoctors Last Call review of -24 by Andy Bierman (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -24 by Barry Leiba (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Barry Leiba
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server by Security Area Directorate Team Will not Review Version
Reviewed revision 24 (document currently at 40)
Result Has nits
Completed 2021-06-15
review-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-server-24-secdir-lc-leiba-2021-06-15-00
I see nothing of substance here to comment on, and only have two minor
editorial comments.

In Section 2:
   The lists of algorithms are ordered such that, if multiple
   algorithms are permitted by the client, the algorithm that appears
   first in its list that is also permitted by the server is used for
   the SSH transport layer connection.

I found this a little awkward to read, and it also seems that the ordering is
only significant for the client list, and not for the server list.  May I
suggest this minor re-wording?:

NEW
   The lists of permitted algorithms are in decreasing order of usage
   preference.  The algorithm that appears first in the client list
   that also appears in the server list is the one that is used for
   the SSH transport layer connection.
END

In “Since the module in this document only define groupings”, make it
“modules”, plural, to match “define” (three instances).