Last Call Review of draft-ietf-dime-erp-14
review-ietf-dime-erp-14-secdir-lc-roca-2012-11-08-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dime-erp
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 17)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2012-09-24
Requested 2012-09-14
Authors Julien Bournelle , Lionel Morand , Sebastien Decugis , Qin Wu , Glen Zorn
I-D last updated 2012-11-08
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -12 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -16 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -14 by Vincent Roca (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -16 by Vincent Roca (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Vincent Roca
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-dime-erp by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 14 (document currently at 17)
Result Has issues
Completed 2012-11-08
review-ietf-dime-erp-14-secdir-lc-roca-2012-11-08-00
Hello,

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.

--




The security section of this document is pretty simple as it refers to

the security section of 4 related documents and that's all. On the

opposite, each of these 4 documents includes a very detailed security

analysis.  The contrast is extremely important!

This is all the more annoying as draft-ietf-dime-erp-14 introduces new

mechanisms, and thereby new potential threats and issues (it's usually

the case).

What should I understand? Is the proposal guaranteed to be secure?

Or have all the potential weaknesses been already addressed in the

4 related documents? I can not conclude after reading this security section

and this is a problem.

So, I'd like that the authors clarify this, and if need be, I'd like the authors

explicitly mention which items in each of the 4 related documents apply.

It would be helpful IMHO.

Cheers,

   Vincent