Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ice-trickle-16

Request Review of draft-ietf-ice-trickle
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 21)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2018-02-22
Requested 2018-02-08
Authors Emil Ivov , Eric Rescorla , Justin Uberti , Peter Saint-Andre
I-D last updated 2018-03-08
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -16 by Roni Even (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -16 by David Mandelberg (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -18 by Sarah Banks (diff)
Assignment Reviewer David Mandelberg
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-ice-trickle by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 16 (document currently at 21)
Result Has nits
Completed 2018-03-08

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 summary of the review is: ready with nits.

(nit) Section 2: What is a "ufrag pair"? Is it short for username 
fragment pair? I might have just missed it, but I don't see a definition 
in the referenced terminology.

(nit) Section 15: If I understand correctly, the signaling protocol also 
needs to guarantee that the end-of-candidates indication is not 
re-ordered with respect to any trickled candidates. Is that correct? Is 
it worth adding to the requirements?

Freelance cyber security consultant, software developer, and more