Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

Thanks for writing this document. I believe it is ready to move forward, despite the unsubstantiated worries about weakening RFC 3118 security :-)

One small comment:

>   The server SHOULD NOT include the nonce in an ACK when responding to
>   a renew unless a nonce was generated. 

... unless a *new* nonce was generated ...?

(Ralph Droms) Yes

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Stewart Bryant) No Objection

(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection

(Wesley Eddy) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) No Objection

Should you describe a mechanism whereby the nonce can be changed?

---

Section 6
Please don;t refer to this as a "proposal". It is just about to become
an RFC. Use "document".

(Stephen Farrell) No Objection

- I agree with Russ' discuss based on the gen-art review.

- I like the idea as explained in the response to the gen-art
review, but didn't get that from the abstract or writeup so I
think fixing those to make the purpose of this clear (make
off-path attacks hard) would be good.

- What is an RDM? (3.1.3) Better to spell that out rather
than force the reader off to rfc 3115.

- Shouldn't there be a requirement to use a different "reconfigure
key value" every single time? If those are re-used, then a client
could pretend to be the server.

- I guess I wondered if you can do this, why can't the server just
sign the response with a private key? 

- Should there be an IANA registry for the type field here in
case you ever want more than hmac-md5?

(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Pete Resnick) No Objection

The portion of 3.1.2 which starts "The following fields are set in an DHCP authentication option for the Forcerenew Nonce Authentication Protocol:" is poorly written. The fields are not listed in order, the explanation for length is incorrect. This needs to be rewritten.

(Peter Saint-Andre) No Objection

I concur with the DISCUSS that Russ lodged (based on the Gen-ART review).

(Robert Sparks) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Sean Turner) (was Discuss) No Objection