Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05

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
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 09)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2022-01-30
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


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.