Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06
review-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06-secdir-lc-turner-2017-06-28-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2017-06-29
Requested 2017-06-15
Authors Thomas H. Clausen , Christopher Dearlove , Ulrich Herberg , Henning Rogge
I-D last updated 2017-06-28
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -06 by Peter E. Yee (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Sheng Jiang (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Sean Turner (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Sean Turner
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 07)
Result Ready
Completed 2017-06-28
review-ietf-manet-rfc5444-usage-06-secdir-lc-turner-2017-06-28-00
This draft is well written and in fact provides a wonderful overview of MANET. 
The draft updates RFC5444 based on some operational experience (and thanks for
that); though it does not specify a protocol it is constraining RFC 5444
implementations hence the “updates” header.

From a security perspective this draft seems fine; there is one
security-related update and it is explained in the security considerations.

From a non-MANET expert perspective, I have to admit that I found it hard to
figure out exactly what is being “updated”.  It’s a style thing that I’m not
hard over on, but an informative section explaining what got changed would have
really helped this reader.  I will note that there are a couple of places where
the draft is clear that is updates 5444, e.g., s4.4.1, s.4.6,  so I have to
wonder are those the only update?  Or, is it that all the 2119 requirements for
the processing rules update 5444 and you’d only look in 5444 for the packet
formats?