Authorization for NSIS Signaling Layer Protocols
RFC 5981

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

(Lars Eggert) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) No Objection

(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Tim Polk) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2010-09-09)
No email
send info
1. Assuming HMAC_SIGNED bring new functionality, why only support HMAC?

2. Is there a compelling reason to specify HMAC-MD5 instead of HMAC-SHA1?

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) No Objection

(Sean Turner) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2010-09-14)
No email
send info
Updated #4 to be more specific.

1) Sec 3.2.7: MUST?

OLD:

rsv: reserved bits and must be set to 0 (zero) and ignored upon
   reception.

NEW:

rsv: reserved bits and MUST be set to 0 (zero) and ignored upon
   reception.

2) Sec 3.7, MUST?

OLD:

... they must be delivered
   via the GIST API and normalized to ...

NEW:

... they MUST be delivered
   via the GIST API and normalized to ...

3) Figure in Sec 4.3 only shows PGP_CERT.  Should it also show X509_V3_CERT?  Also shouldn't the other figures in the draft include "Figure #"?

4) Sec 4.4: Replace recommended with RECOMMENDED (x2)?

5) Sec 4.4: hash algorithm must be chosen vs hash algorithm MUST be chosen?