IS-IS Generic Cryptographic Authentication
RFC 5310

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

Comment (2008-12-10)
No email
send info
Figure 1:

                   0                   1
                   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                   |     Type 10   |     Length    |
                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                   |   Auth Type   |
                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                   |            Key ID             |
                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                   |                               |
                   +                               +
                   | Authentication Data (Variable)|
                   +                               +
                   |                               |
                   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

I found the formatting confusing. Does the missing
fourth octet mean that it is (a) reserved or (b)
omitted and Auth Type and Key ID are actually consequtive
fields? Please clarify.

(Ross Callon) Yes

(Tim Polk) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Lisa Dusseault) No Objection

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

Comment (2008-12-10)
No email
send info
Section 4., paragraph 7:
>    [RFC4086] contains helpful information on both key
>    generation techniques and cryptographic randomness.

  [RFC4086] isn't mentioned in the references.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(Chris Newman) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Mark Townsley) No Objection

Magnus Westerlund No Objection

(David Ward) (was Yes) Recuse