Hi Vincent, Thanks a lot for your review. Please see inline below for my comments.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 3:57 PM Vincent Roca via Datatracker < [email protected]> wrote: > Reviewer: Vincent Roca > Review result: Has Nits > > Hello, > > I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate’s ongoing > effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These > comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area > directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > Summary: Has Nits > > Thank you for the clarification of the Security Considerations section. > I just have a minor comment and a typo. > > - It is said (section 6): > "The CMD SHOULD use a pacing approach to limit > this amplification risk." > I agree, but where do you intend to apply pacing? In the incoming queue > (i.e., > by delaying some PBU/PBA messages) or in the outgoing queue (i.e., to limit > output traffic), or both? It's a bit unclear. > [CB] I meant limiting the output traffic. I've clarified this in version -06 (to be submitted soon). > > - Typo: remove one "exist" in sentence: "there may exist multiple previous > (e.g., k) MAARs exist." > > [CB] Fixed, thanks. Thanks again for your comments. Carlos > Regards, Vincent > > >
_______________________________________________ dmm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
