Hello Ran, Thank you for your review. We will address your points in the next draft update, which is currently in preparation. I put some more comments inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ran Chen via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 10:36 AM > To: ops-dir@xxxxxxxx > Cc: anima@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm-15 > > Reviewer: Ran Chen > Review result: Has Nits > > This document extends the original BRSKI (Bootstrapping Remote Secure Key > Infrastructure) protocol by introducing a new operational mode—Pledge in > Responder Mode (PRM). This extension is particularly useful in constrained or > dynamic network environments where the traditional initiator-based workflow of > BRSKI may not be feasible. It would be better to have a separate section for > operational consideration. [stf] Your comment emphasizes the comment we got from Mahesh during his AD review. We are currently working on an operational consideration section, which will on one hand summarizes some of the points mentioned in the architecture (section 5) and component (section 6) description but also provide further information. > > ## Minor > For Normative References: > I-D.ietf-netconf-sztp-csr updated to RFC9646. [stf] already corrected > Please pay more attention to I-D. draft-ietf-anima-rfc8366bis, which is still in WG > draft status. [stf] some of the initial content from BRSKI-PRM regarding voucher enhancements was moved to RFC8366bis, so we are in constant exchange to ensure alignment. > > Section 6.2.1 > The term described in rfc8995 is Slowloris-like attack, not Slowloris attack. > It is recommended to change it to Slowloris-like attack. [stf -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
