Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn-02
review-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn-02-artart-lc-salz-2025-01-06-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 05) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | ART Area Review Team (artart) | |
| Deadline | 2025-01-13 | |
| Requested | 2024-12-30 | |
| Authors | Valery Smyslov | |
| I-D last updated | 2025-03-16 (Latest revision 2025-03-16) | |
| Completed reviews |
Artart IETF Last Call review of -02
by Rich Salz
(diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -03 by Derrell Piper (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Rich Salz |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn by ART Area Review Team Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/phuIqKMzMqIhsMb6rN3CFkKi4rA | |
| Reviewed revision | 02 (document currently at 05) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2025-01-06 |
review-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-rename-esn-02-artart-lc-salz-2025-01-06-00
I'm the ARTART reviewer for this document. The kinds of things this directorate looks for are described at https://wiki.ietf.org/group/art/TypicalARTAreaIssues I found this wording initially confusing: "the sender in accordance with AH ([RFC4302] Section 3.3.2) and ESP ([RFC4303] Section 3.3.3) specifications" I suggest "the sender in accordance with the specifications for AH ([RFC4302] Section 3.3.2) and ESP ([RFC4303] Section 3.3.3) ..." That aside, I found the Introduction incredibly useful background information, thank you. I found nothing of concern otherwise.