Telechat Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04

Request Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 05)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2013-02-05
Requested 2013-01-24
Authors Jonathan Lennox
Draft last updated 2013-02-05
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -04 by Martin Thomson (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -04 by Martin Thomson (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Scott Kelly (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Martin Thomson 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04-genart-telechat-thomson-2013-02-05
Reviewed rev. 04 (document currently at 05)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2013-02-05


FYI, I can't believe that I did this again.

Sorry Russ.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson at>
Date: 17 January 2013 13:49
Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04
To: draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext.all at

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at


Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04
Reviewer: Martin Thomson
Review Date: 2013-01-17
IETF LC End Date: 2013-01-17
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:  This document is clear, well-written and ready for
publication as proposed standard.

Minor issues:  I wonder if it is necessary to establish a registry for
the labels used in SRTP key derivation (k_e, k_s, k_he, k_hs, etc...).
 As unlikely as it seems, a collision in this space would be bad.

Nits/editorial comments:
S5: s/alternate/alternative/