Re: [Last-Call] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-add-dnr-09

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Rich,

Thank you for the review and comments. All good points!

A PR to fix those can be seen at: https://github.com/boucadair/draft-btw-add-home-network/pull/11.

I prefer to maintain 6125. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Rich Salz via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx>
> Envoyé : vendredi 1 juillet 2022 20:27
> À : secdir@xxxxxxxx
> Cc : add@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-add-dnr.all@xxxxxxxx; last-
> call@xxxxxxxx
> Objet : Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-add-dnr-09
> 
> Reviewer: Rich Salz
> Review result: Has Nits
> 
> Some minor editorial issues, all could be fixed in last call or
> auth48.
> 
> Sec 1, the parenthetical in paragraph three reads like a sentence
> fragment; is ", or local networks..." correct?
> 
> Throughout, the use of "encrypted DNS resolver" kept confusing me
> -- does this mean where the data files, or the executable are
> encrypted? Perhaps "resolver supporting encrypted DNS" is more
> clear and not too wordy.
> 
> Sec 3, paragraph two. Just IPv6?  Seems wrong given the in-
> document definition of DHCP and the text in 3.1.3. Some editorial
> clean-up here seems needed.
> 
> Sec 3.1.1, since 6125bis is (hopefully) forthcoming, does this
> need revising?
> 
> Is the second paragraph of 3.1.2 appropriate? Probably, any answer
> is fine. But I would say "associate a DNS encryption protocol with
> each IP address." The last sentence is redundant.
> 
> In 3.1.5, the "e.g." parenthetical seems misplaced; maybe after
> "encrypted DNS protocols (e.g.,..." ?  REALLY NICE to see SVCB
> encodings re-used.
> 
> Paramters as a typo for Parameters appears in a couple of places
> (5.1 and 6.1)
> 
> Sec 7 is good, and seems comprehensive.  I am not a DNS nor a DHCP
> expert.
> 
> The last sentence of the first paragraph of 7.1 seems out of
> place. Is there a risk associated with this? Why is this a
> concern? (I can guess, but perhaps make it explicit)
> 
> The bullet list of mitigations needs something like "In RA-
> Guard...." adding the word "In" Other constructs are reasonable,
> too.
> 
> 


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux