Last Call Review of draft-ietf-babel-dtls-05
review-ietf-babel-dtls-05-genart-lc-romascanu-2019-06-25-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-babel-dtls
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2019-07-04
Requested 2019-06-20
Authors Antonin Décimo , David Schinazi , Juliusz Chroboczek
I-D last updated 2019-06-25
Completed reviews Rtgdir Early review of -00 by Tony Przygienda (diff)
Secdir Early review of -03 by Sean Turner (diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -06 by Henning Rogge (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Sean Turner (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Dan Romascanu
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-babel-dtls by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/VSOfM9RbZU4MaF-CEU3WBRCdxog
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 10)
Result Ready
Completed 2019-06-25
review-ietf-babel-dtls-05-genart-lc-romascanu-2019-06-25-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-babel-dtls-05
Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review Date: 2019-06-25
IETF LC End Date: 2019-07-04
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat

Summary:

The document is Ready from a Gen-ART perspective. A couple of unclear /
redundant statements are mentioned in the 'nits/editorial comments' bullet
below.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

Nits/editorial comments:

1. In section 2.1:

> The default port
   for Babel over DTLS is registered with IANA as the "babel-dtls" port
   (UDP port TBD, see Section 4), and the port exchanging unencrypted
   Babel traffic is registered as the "babel" port (UDP port 6696).

A reference would be desirable here.

2. In section 2.4

> Nodes MUST silently ignore any unprotected
   packet sent over unicast.  When parsing an unprotected packet, a node
   MUST silently ignore all TLVs that are not of type Hello.  Nodes MUST
   also silently ignore any unprotected Hello with the Unicast flag set.

Is the last sentence necessary? Is this case not covered by the statement in
the first sentence?