Hi, Right. My fault, I just missed the mail from Christer. I’ll get back to it asap.
- Jouni > On 02 Jun 2016, at 06:24, Jari Arkko <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for your review, and good questions, Christer. Authors, I have not > seen a response or a new version. What’s up? > > Jari > > On 07 May 2016, at 17:48, Christer Holmberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on >> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at >> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq> >> >> Document: draft-ietf-dime-e2e-sec-req-04 >> Reviewer: Christer Holmberg >> Review Date: 7 May 2016 >> IETF LC End Date: 12 April 2016 >> IETF Telechat Date: N/A >> Summary: The document is well written, >> and almost ready for publication is informational RFC. However, I have a few >> editorial issues, related to the Introduction, that I ask the authors to >> address. >> Major Issues: None >> Minor Issues: None >> Editorial Issues: >> >> Q_ABSTRACT_1: >> >> The text says that the draft “discusses” requirements. In my opinion it >> should say “defines” or “specifies”. >> >> >> Q_INTRODUCTION_1: >> >> Please add references for TLS (for TCP) and DTLS (for SCTP). >> >> >> Q_INTRODUCTION_2: >> >> The text says: “…or alternative security mechanisms independent of Diameter >> (e.g., IPsec) is used.” >> >> 2A: I guess it should be “are used”? >> >> 2B: I am not sure I understand what “independent of Diameter” means. >> >> >> Q_INTRODUCTION_3: >> >> The text talks about security between non-neighbour nodes, while the draft >> name includes “e2e”. However, when reading Section 4, non-neighbour does not >> necessarily mean end-to-end. I think it would be good to explicitly clarify >> that in the Introduction. >> >> >> Q_INTRODUCTION_4: >> >> The text says: “This document collects requirements for developing a >> solution to protect Diameter AVPs.” >> >> 2A: It needs to be clear that it’s about protecting AVPs between >> non-neighbour nodes. >> >> 2B: Instead of “collect”, please use the same terminology as in the Abstract. >> >> >> Q_INTRODUCTION_5: >> >> Please enhance AVP on first occurrence. Currently it’s not done >> until Section 3. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gen-art mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
