Re: [IPsec] Comments about draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-02

Hi Tero, Thanks for the response. Version 4 of the draft has been updated with this alternative. Yours, Daniel On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Tero Kivinen wrote: > Daniel Migault writes: > > another alternative could be: > > > > As the IV MUST NOT repeat for one SA when

Re: [IPsec] Comments about draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-02

Daniel Migault writes: > another alternative could be: > > As the IV MUST NOT repeat for one SA when Counter-Mode ciphers are >    used, Implicit IV as described in this document MUST NOT be used in >    setups with the chance that the Sequence Number overlaps for one SA. >    Multicast as

Re: [IPsec] Comments about draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-02

Hi, Thank you Tero for the review. Please find in line my responses in line. version 02 of the draft has been updated accordingly to your review. Yours, Daniel On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Tero Kivinen wrote: > While doing my IANA review on the document I found some small

[IPsec] Comments about draft-ietf-ipsecme-implicit-iv-02

While doing my IANA review on the document I found some small nits about it. Here are my comments to the document: -- Typo in abstract: This avoids sending the nonce itself, and savec in the case of AES-GCM, AES-CCM,