Extended Sequence Number (ESN) Addendum to IPsec Domain of Interpretation (DOI) for Internet Security Association and Key Management Protocol (ISAKMP)
draft-ietf-ipsec-esn-addendum-03

[Ballot comment]
Reviewed by Suzanne Woolf, Gen-ART

Her review (worth including for the praise):

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a standards track
extension to IKE.

The draft documents a new extension to ISAKMP to support 64-bit
sequence numbers within a security association. It is admirably brief in
documenting what the attribute is good for, a few cautions against
inadvertently weak uses, and error-handling. The "IANA Considerations"
reference to a "magic" number isn't entirely clear, but that may be
because I'm not familiar in depth with IKE.

idnits notes the wrong boilerplate (2026) and that references aren't
separated between normative and informative. But all the pieces seem
to be here.

IANA Comments:
Upon approval of this document the IANA will assign a new
IPSEC Security Association Attribute for Extended (64-bit) Sequence Number
at the following registry:

Please confirm that this is correct.

[Ballot discuss]
This document states that mandatory-to-implement algorithms will be given in a separate document; however, there is no reference given to that document. This document needs to block until the "algorithms" document is available.

[Ballot discuss]
- It says (in abstract):
    Comments should be sent to Stephen Kent (kent@bbn.com).
  Mmm... not to ipsec mailing list?
- missing IPR section
- Strange disclaimer on page 4 (do we do such things?):

    Disclaimer

    The views and specification here are those of the authors and are not
    necessarily those of their employers.  The authors and their
    employers specifically disclaim responsibility for any problems
    arising from correct or incorrect implementation or use of this
    specification.

[Ballot comment]
No objection, but (can't resist) although the title uses the abbreviation
"IPsec" correctly, I note that thoughout the document the term often appears
as "IPSEC". Since the spelling "IPSEC" is a common nit corrected by the
IESG, it would be nice if this document were to set a good example.