Bruce,
Thanks see inline
Roni
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Lowekamp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 4:20 PM
To: Roni Even
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] comments on draft-ietf-p2psip-base-00
Hi Roni. Thanks for the comments and questions.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:47 AM, Roni Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read the updated draft and have some initial feedback
>
>
>
> 1. In section 5.1.3 it says " it MUST construct the destination list
> by reversing the order of the entries on the via list." I suggest to relax
> the MUST to SHOULD enabling other routing algorithms.
>
Good comment. I would probably rather leave the MUST but qualify it
with something like "If using the default symmetric recursive
routing..."
RE - qualifying a MUST is a SHOULD according to the IETF terminology
> 5. I am a bit unsure how does the destination peer know who what is
> the node-id of the source of a request.
>
Should always learn the source of the request through the message
signature (5.2.4).
RE - The identity type is not always the node-id according to 5.2.4 it can be
the certificate
"
identity
The identity or certificate used to form the signature
signature_value
The value of the signature
A number of possible identity formats are permitted. The current
possibilities are: a Node-ID, a user name, and a certificate.
For signatures over messages the input to the signature is computed
over:
overlay + transaction_id + MessageContents + SignerIdentity
Where overlay and transaction_id come from the forwarding header and
+ indicates concatenation.
"
Bruce
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Roni Even
>
> ________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> P2PSIP mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
>
>
_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
