Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mext-flow-binding-
review-ietf-mext-flow-binding-secdir-lc-tsou-2010-05-11-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-mext-flow-binding |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 11) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2010-05-04 | |
| Requested | 2010-04-19 | |
| Authors | Nicolas Montavont , George Tsirtsis , Koojana Kuladinithi , Gerardo Giaretta , Hesham Soliman | |
| I-D last updated | 2010-05-11 | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir Last Call review of -??
by Tina Tsou (Ting ZOU)
|
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tina Tsou (Ting ZOU) |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-mext-flow-binding by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Completed | 2010-05-11 |
review-ietf-mext-flow-binding-secdir-lc-tsou-2010-05-11-00
Hi, 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. Some of my comments are following. Comment 1: The title of this document focuses on flow binding in Mobile IPv6 and NEMO, However it is not clear how flow binding is supported in the NEMO? Is the mobile router operation in NEMO same as mobile node operation in Mobile IPv6? Comment 2: Is flow summary mobility option is one sub-option of Flow Identification Mobility Option or one independent new mobility option? Comment 3: Should the HA, CN and MAP all support this specification? If HA does not support, how to direct inbound flows to specific addresses since one or more flows may bind to a care-of address? B. R. Tina http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html