Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-18
review-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-18-secdir-lc-salz-2024-05-21-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 20)
Type IETF Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2024-05-24
Requested 2024-05-10
Requested by Jim Guichard
Authors Jie Dong , Stewart Bryant , Zhenqiang Li , Takuya Miyasaka , Young Lee
I-D last updated 2025-03-27 (Latest revision 2024-06-14)
Completed reviews Opsdir IETF Last Call review of -18 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Rtgdir IETF Last Call review of -19 by Russ White (diff)
Secdir IETF Last Call review of -18 by Rich Salz (diff)
Genart IETF Last Call review of -19 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -19 by David L. Black (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -19 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -15 by Ketan Talaulikar (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Rich Salz
State Completed
Request IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/u76e0iUTUDdG0afVEh0Tz71-z_c
Reviewed revision 18 (document currently at 20)
Result Has nits
Completed 2024-05-21
review-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn-18-secdir-lc-salz-2024-05-21-00
All page references are to the text version available at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn/

I found it frustrating that the VPN acronym was explained in the Introduction
but it wasn't until the bottom of p4 that NRP was spelled out.

Bottom of page 5 has "The required layered network structure ..."  Hubris? ;)
Maybe "One possible layered network ..."

Other then that, the introduction does a GREAT job of explaining the
motivation, issues, and technology involved. This holds true, analogously, for
all the other sections. As a result, I am bothered that I have to say "it has
nits" because they really pale in comparison to the rest of the text. Congrats
to the authors.

I paid special attention to the security considerations and could not think of
anything not already well-covered there.

Even if not addressed, this document is ready and really brings up the quality
average of IETF RFCs.