I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-ietf-msec-tesla-for-alc-norm-07 Reviewer: Pete McCann Review Date: 24 July 2009 IETF LC End Date: 23 July 2009 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Almost ready Major issues: none Minor issues: I'd suggest a more prominent reference to RFC 4082, especially to section 3.1 that describes the basic idea behind TESLA. You do have a reference just before Section 1.1, but perhaps you could add some explanatory text here to make it clear that the an overview of the use of hash chains to efficiently authenticate a long stream of packets is described in RFC 4082. Section 2.4.2.2: The sender and receivers use the direct time synchronization scheme to synchronize with the various time references. Should this say "indirect time synchronization scheme"? Nits/editorial comments: Section 1: On the opposite, the ALC protocol SHOULD BE: On the other hand, the ALC protocol a appropriate SHOULD BE: an appropriate Section 2.2.1: that TESLA can benefit. SHOULD BE: from which TESLA can benefit. Section 2.2.2: all be able SHOULD BE: all are able Section 2.3.3: will be or not acceptable SHOULD BE: will or will not be acceptable Section 3.4.1: to 1.. SHOULD BE: to 1. Section 4.3.2: when a receiver receivers packets SHOULD BE: when a receiver receives packets _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
