Last Call Review of draft-ietf-roll-applicability-ami-12
review-ietf-roll-applicability-ami-12-secdir-lc-lonvick-2016-04-07-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-roll-applicability-ami |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2016-04-12 | |
| Requested | 2016-03-23 | |
| Authors | Nancy Cam-Winget , Jonathan Hui , Daniel Popa | |
| Draft last updated | 2016-04-07 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -12
by
Christer Holmberg
(diff)
Secdir Early review of -07 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -12 by Chris M. Lonvick (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -12 by Susan Hares (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Chris M. Lonvick |
| State | Completed | |
| Review |
review-ietf-roll-applicability-ami-12-secdir-lc-lonvick-2016-04-07
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 12 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Has Nits | |
| Completed | 2016-04-07 |
review-ietf-roll-applicability-ami-12-secdir-lc-lonvick-2016-04-07-00
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.
Overall, the document looks great. This is a very information-dense
document and the authors and contributors have done a wonderful job
of putting it together. While I do not follow the technology, I was
able to understand the concepts and I could see that the security
considerations were appropriate.
Some very small nits that the authors may want to consider:
- the terms DODAG, DIO, and DAO are not expanded anywhere. (Yeah, I
know I could go look them up... ;-)
- The 2nd paragraph in 9.3 ends with "Known schemes". I figure
someone was going to write something more there.
Regards,
Chris