IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-netmod-immutable-flag-11
review-ietf-netmod-immutable-flag-11-secdir-lc-nystrom-2026-06-08-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-netmod-immutable-flag |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 14) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2026-06-07 | |
| Requested | 2026-05-25 | |
| Requested by | Mahesh Jethanandani | |
| Authors | Qiufang Ma , Qin Wu , Balázs Lengyel , Hongwei Li | |
| I-D last updated | 2026-07-16 (Latest revision 2026-07-02) | |
| Completed reviews |
Yangdoctors Early review of -06
by Per Andersson
(diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -11 by Joel M. Halpern (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -11 by Magnus Nyström (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Magnus Nyström |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-netmod-immutable-flag by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/3r2PDBAoBN9yq4NiNzKZqO1C7hM | |
| Reviewed revision | 11 (document currently at 14) | |
| Result | Has nits | |
| Completed | 2026-06-08 |
review-ietf-netmod-immutable-flag-11-secdir-lc-nystrom-2026-06-08-00
The netmod-immutable-flag I-D is well written as is it's Security Considerations section. However, I do have one suggestion which is to specify not just that secure transport layer "have to" (which BTW is not RFC2119) be used, but also the actual requirements of that layer - e.g., is confidentiality required? Is integrity? E.g., the need for mutual authentication is proscribed, but without integrity protection that could prove less valuable.