Hi Alan!

Thanks for the quick response.  Since these are minor, I already started the 
IETF LC.  Nevertheless, having an updated draft with these changes is even 
better.

More inline ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan DeKok <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 5:12 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Emu] AD Review of draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-02
> 
> On May 13, 2020, at 4:25 PM, Roman Danyliw <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I conducted my AD review of draft-ietf-emu-eap-session-id-02.  The document
> is in good shape.  I have largely editorial feedback below that can be handled
> with IETF LC input.
> >
> > (1) Section 1.  Editorial.  COMMENTs often come up in IESG review the it 
> > isn't
> clear up front what exactly is being updated.  I recommend something like ...
> >
> > OLD
> > We correct that deficiency here.
> > NEW
> > We correct these deficiencies here by updating [RFC5247] with the Session-Id
> derivation during fast-authentication exchange for EAP-SIM and EAP-AKA; and
> defining Session-Id derivation for PEAP.
> 
>   Fixed.
> 
> > (2) Section 1. Editorial.  Per ..., it would be important to get this 
> > resolved with
> a clearly defined and agreed derivation rules to allow fast re- authentication
> cases to be used to derive ERP key hierarchy", I'm not sure this additional
> explanation is needed and this is a run-on sentence from the previous text.
> 
>   How about:
> 
> The IEEE is defining FILS authentication [FILS], which needs the EAP 
> Session-Id
> in order for the EAP Re-authentication Protocol (ERP) [RFC6696] to work.  It 
> is
> therefore important to address the existing deficiencies in the definition of 
> EAP
> Session-Id.

The above text works for me.

> > (3) Section 2.2.  Editorial.
> >
> > OLD
> > Similarly for EAP-SIM, it says:
> > NEW
> > Similarly, for EAP-SIM, [RFC5247] Appendix A says:
> 
>   Fixed.
> 
> > (4) Section 2.2.  Editorial.  Why not the explicit symmetry in language in 
> > EAP-
> SIM as was used in EAP AKA?
> >
> > OLD
> > EAP-SIM is defined in [RFC4186].  The EAP-SIM Session-Id is the  ...
> > NEW
> > EAP-SIM is defined in [RFC4186].  When using full authentication, the EAP-
> SIM Session-Id is the  ...
> 
>  Fixed.
> 
> > (5) Section 2.2.  Recommend defining RAND1, RAND2 and RAND3 explicitly
> since RFC4186 only has it in the test vector section.  Perhaps something like:
> >
> > "RAND1, RAND2 and RAND3 correspond to the RAND value from the first,
> second and third GSM triplet respectively."
> 
>   Fixed.
> 
> > (6) Section 3.  It would be useful to describe the prior work in Security
> Considerations.  Specifically, "These updates to not modify the Security
> Considerations outlined in RFC5247."
> 
>   Fixed.
> 
>   I'll publish a new version shortly.

Much appreciated!

Thanks,
Roman

>   Alan DeKok.

_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu

Reply via email to