Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-1323bis-19
review-ietf-tcpm-1323bis-19-secdir-lc-moriarty-2014-02-19-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tcpm-1323bis |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 21) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2014-02-18 | |
| Requested | 2014-02-06 | |
| Authors | David Borman , Robert T. Braden , Van Jacobson , Richard Scheffenegger | |
| I-D last updated | 2014-02-19 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -19
by Scott W. Brim
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -20 by Scott W. Brim (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -19 by Kathleen Moriarty (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -19 by Fred Baker (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Kathleen Moriarty |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-tcpm-1323bis by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 19 (document currently at 21) | |
| Result | Has issues | |
| Completed | 2014-02-19 |
review-ietf-tcpm-1323bis-19-secdir-lc-moriarty-2014-02-19-00
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. draft-ietf-tcpm-1323bis-19 is mostly ready. Discussion of the possible DoS attacks that could occur from the technique described in section 5.3 should be included in this section and mentioned in the security considerations section as well. Suppose again that segments: A.1, B.1, C.1, ..., Z.1 have been sent in sequence and that segment B.1 has been lost. Furthermore, suppose delivery of some of C.1, ... Z.1 is delayed until *after* the retransmission B.2 arrives at the receiver. These delayed segments will be discarded unnecessarily when they do arrive, since their timestamps are now out of date. Thank you, Kathleen