Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion-
review-ietf-ledbat-congestion-secdir-lc-moriarty-2012-05-04-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2012-05-07
Requested 2012-04-26
Authors Stanislav Shalunov , Greg Hazel , Jana Iyengar , Mirja K├╝hlewind
I-D last updated 2012-05-04
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Kathleen Moriarty
Assignment Reviewer Kathleen Moriarty
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Result Ready
Completed 2012-05-04
review-ietf-ledbat-congestion-secdir-lc-moriarty-2012-05-04-00
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.

Security risks should be minimized since it is designed to back off to standard
TCP behavior in congestion situations.  It can be used in transport or in
applications by design.  The Security considerations section says it relies on
'authenticating' time stamps, so the security relies upon the application or
protocol at the higher level to have a method to do this.

The draft is written more like a whitepaper than a typical RFC, so it made it
tough to follow the flow of the algorithm.

NITS:
Section 2, 3rd line in second paragraph: typo
Change from: avoidoing
To: avoiding

Section 2.1: the section ends with a ',' at the end of #3

Thanks,
Kathleen