Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Ready
-10 is ready
___
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
Hi Paul,
Those changes resolve the issue and nits I saw,
Cheers,
S.
On 05/04/2023 17:21, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Tue, 4 Apr 2023, Stephen Farrell via Datatracker wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the secdir review!
This is basically fine, but I think there's one issue that
isn't quite a nit
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell
Review result: Has Issues
This is basically fine, but I think there's one issue that
isn't quite a nit:
1.3: "Typically, the other TS_TYPE would be of type
TS_IPV4_ADDR_RANGE and/or TS_IPV6_ADDR_RANGE." That seems a
bit vague, and maybe less future proof
Hiya,
On 03/10/17 21:38, Alexander Truskovsky wrote:
> This allows X.509 certificates to contain two (or more) public keys
> and issuer signatures. The goal would be to ease the migration of
> PKI and dependent protocols to new digital signature algorithms. The
> motivation was to make the
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis-05: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-rfc7321bis-05: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
On 13/10/16 13:27, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Hi, Stephen
>
>>
>> - Wouldn't it be good to encourage minimising re-use of public
>> values for multiple key exchanges? As-is, the text sort-of
>> encourages use for "many key exchanges" in section 4.
>
> I don’t think so.
Fair enough, though when I
Thanks Tero and sorry for forgetting:-)
Cheers,
S.
On 13/10/16 13:04, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Stephen Farrell writes:
>> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-ipsecme-saf
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-safecurves-05: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
On 27/09/16 20:07, Valery Smyslov wrote:
>
> The attacker can however gain some benefits if he/she waits some time
> until the half-open SA is expired on Responder and chooses the same SPI
> and nonce for the next connection request. He/she will receive the same
> puzzle
> if the Responder
On 27/09/16 20:21, Yoav Nir wrote:
> Looking at the IPR statement you linked to, it does not seem relevant
> to me, but IANAL. The proof-of-work scheme described in the patent
> ([2]) involves setting a time limit for the client to complete the
> puzzle solution. The puzzle in our draft has a
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ddos-protection-09: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
On 30/08/16 19:55, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> I'll leave this text alone from the WG response, at least for now.
> Being able to work on it in months makes sense even if it isn't the
> best long term solution.
I'm ok with that. But note that my suggested wording is not meant
to commit the WG to
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-ipsecme-10-00: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
The document, along
That change is really good thanks,
S
On 09/07/15 08:51, Yoav Nir wrote:
So, how about replacing the first two paragraphs?
OLD:
The Advanced Encryption Standard (AES - [FIPS-197]) has become the
gold standard in encryption. Its efficient design, wide
implementation, and hardware
On 08/07/15 14:49, Paul Wouters wrote:
Camellia is widely supported in
browsers for example. So your text ought be fixed.
Not in IKE or IPsec.
Then all that's needed is to qualify the only properly.
It's better to be accurate really I think.
S.
Hiya,
On 08/07/15 06:36, Yoav Nir wrote:
Hi, Stephen.
See below.
On Jul 8, 2015, at 2:15 AM, Stephen Farrell
stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie wrote:
--
COMMENT
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-chacha20-poly1305-11: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
Done
S
On 04/06/15 14:40, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Please accept this erratum and mark it has Held for document update.
--Paul Hoffman
On Jun 4, 2015, at 5:08 AM, RFC Errata System rfc-edi...@rfc-editor.org
wrote:
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7296,
Internet Key
On Sun May 31 16:57:43 2015 GMT+0100, Paul Wouters wrote:
On Wed, 27 May 2015, Stephen Farrell wrote:
- 2.5: hand out is an odd phrase here - would be better
to expand on that I think and say more precisely what
should never be done.
How about:
Yep that's better.
Ta
S
OLD
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2-null-auth-06: Yes
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer
In case anyone wonders, my reply to Yaron was basically:
I dunno will be interested to find out if you're
missing something or not
S.
On 08/03/11 07:35, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
Hi Glen,
thank you for your kind words. It is always a pleasure to help a fellow
security working group, and your
22 matches
Mail list logo
