| Hi, Peter,
Thank you for the review.
Most of these issues were addressed already in the -06 version.
Regarding “master key”: RFC 5925 uses the term as a two-word phrase, capitalized only at the beginning of sentences RFC 5926 uses the term Master_Key (note the underscore) as an algorithmic parameter
This doc uses the 5926 version and will be consistent to that. I have added a note in -07 (to be posted shortly) accordingly.
Joe
— Dr. Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
Peter, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document. Lars On 2022-1-30, at 23:25, Peter Yee via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review result: Ready with Nits
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-tcpm-ao-test-vectors-05
Reviewer: Peter Yee
Review Date: 2022-01-30
IETF LC End Date: 2022-02-01
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
Summary: This document supplies test vectors for the MTI authentication
algorithms used in the TCP Authentication Option. There are a few nits that
should be corrected prior to publication. I'm not equipped to validate the test
vectors themselves and did not attempt to do so. [Ready with nits.]
Major issues: None
Minor issues: None
Nits/editorial comments:
Page 2, Abstract: move this entire section before the "Status of this Memo"
section, as required by RFC 7322, section 4.
Page 4, first full paragraph: move "[RFC6978]" after "experimental extension"
to avoid confusion.
Page 10, section 5, 1st paragraph: add a period at the end of the sentence.
Page 20, section 7, 1st sentence: add a period at the end of the sentence.
Page 24, section 8.2: add a comma after "e.g.".
Page 25, section 8.4, 2nd bullet item: change "to" to "in".
Page 25, section 8.4, 3rd bullet item: change first "to" to "in".
Page 25, section 9, 2nd paragraph: between the usage in section 3.1.1 and here,
choose a consistent case for "master_key". I know, RFC 5926 (Master_Key) and
RFC 5925 (master_key) are not consistent between themselves.
_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
|
