Last Call Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis-03
review-ietf-avtcore-6222bis-03-secdir-lc-nystrom-2013-06-13-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2013-06-11
Requested 2013-05-30
Authors Ali C. Begen , Colin Perkins , Dan Wing , Eric Rescorla
I-D last updated 2018-12-20 (Latest revision 2013-07-14)
Completed reviews Genart IETF Last Call review of -03 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -03 by Magnus Nyström (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Magnus Nyström
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-avtcore-6222bis by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 03 (document currently at 06)
Result Has nits
Completed 2013-06-13
review-ietf-avtcore-6222bis-03-secdir-lc-nystrom-2013-06-13-00
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just like any other last call comments.

This avtcore document describes a new method for generating unique RTCP
canonical names and obsoletes RFC 6222.

The Security Considerations section seems adequate to me.

(A few side comments:

- RFC 6222 is mentioned in several places (e.g., Section 1, Section 8). Should
it not also be a reference?

- In Section 4.2, it is stated that, if the RTP endpoint is in a virtualized
environment, then the MAC address may not be unique. In such cases, the host
shall use the other presented option for short-term persistent RTP CNAMEs. I
wonder if it in general is possible for an RTCP endpoint to deterministically
determine if its MAC address is unique? It is not in general possible for a
process to detect if it is running in a virtualized OS.)

Thanks,

-- Magnus