Last Call Review of draft-ietf-payload-rfc4695-bis-
|Requested revision||No specific revision (document currently at 02)|
|Type||Last Call Review|
|Team||Security Area Directorate (secdir)|
|Authors||John Wawrzynek , John Lazzaro|
|I-D last updated||2011-02-22|
Secdir Last Call review of -??
by Dan Harkins
Tsvdir Telechat review of -?? by David L. Black
|Request||Last Call review on draft-ietf-payload-rfc4695-bis by Security Area Directorate Assigned|
Hello, 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. This draft fixes several errors that were found in RFC 4695. I reviewed the changes between RFC 4695 and this draft and found no issues that the Security ADs should be made aware of. The Security Considerations do not seem to have changed. The Security Considerations mention an issue in this draft (and RFC 4695) that can lessen RTP security. I am not suggesting a change to this draft but if the RTP community is interested in addressing this issue I believe it could be fixed by using AES-SIV (RFC 5297) instead of AES-CM (the XOR'd components of the IV used by AES-CM should become distinct, and unpadded, vector inputs to AES-SIV). regards, Dan.