Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05
review-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05-genart-lc-yee-2022-01-30-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 09) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2022-02-01 | |
| Requested | 2022-01-18 | |
| Authors | Dr. Joseph D. Touch , Juhamatti Kuusisaari | |
| I-D last updated | 2022-01-30 | |
| Completed reviews |
Secdir Last Call review of -05
by Christian Huitema
(diff)
Genart Last Call review of -05 by Peter E. Yee (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Peter E. Yee |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Last Call review on draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/CHS1WZam2FsNmxLR2z9sutDZzj0 | |
| Reviewed revision | 05 (document currently at 09) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2022-01-30 |
review-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05-genart-lc-yee-2022-01-30-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05 Reviewer: Peter Yee Review Date: 2022-01-30 IETF LC End Date: 2022-02-01 IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat Summary: This document supplies test vectors for the MTI authentication algorithms used in the TCP Authentication Option. There are a few nits that should be corrected prior to publication. I'm not equipped to validate the test vectors themselves and did not attempt to do so. [Ready with nits.] Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: Page 2, Abstract: move this entire section before the "Status of this Memo" section, as required by RFC 7322, section 4. Page 4, first full paragraph: move "[RFC6978]" after "experimental extension" to avoid confusion. Page 10, section 5, 1st paragraph: add a period at the end of the sentence. Page 20, section 7, 1st sentence: add a period at the end of the sentence. Page 24, section 8.2: add a comma after "e.g.". Page 25, section 8.4, 2nd bullet item: change "to" to "in". Page 25, section 8.4, 3rd bullet item: change first "to" to "in". Page 25, section 9, 2nd paragraph: between the usage in section 3.1.1 and here, choose a consistent case for "master_key". I know, RFC 5926 (Master_Key) and RFC 5925 (master_key) are not consistent between themselves.