Hi Frank, Mea maxima culpa. Your -13 review below was probably overlooked by me when integrating all received feeedbac from -13 into 14/15/16, although it looks more as if i did fix most of the stuff from your review but then forgot to send a reply. This is integretated into -17, i didn't push a new version up, but you can check it at: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/anima-wg/autonomic-control-plane/master/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane/draft-ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane-17.txt Replies inline below Cheers Toerless On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 07:28:05PM -0800, Liang Xia wrote: > Reviewer: Liang Xia > Review result: Has Issues > > In general, this document is well-written and considers security issues > carefully throughout the whole architecture. Thanks! > > nits: > Abstract: /or not misconfigured/or misconfigured/ Was fixed n -16. > the fifth paragraph of section 6.1: the last ")" is redundant, therefore can be > deleted Fixed. > some section titles don't comply the rule of starting from a capital letter Hmm.. checked -13 and -16 but could not find anything besides: (-16) A.3.3.2 mDNS and ... This starts with small letter because "mDNS" is a unique name with a lower letter, i think this is correct. If we're unsure, RFC editor would be best to resolve later on. (-16) Titles are all draft names and this section will be removed anyhow for RFC. > section 6.5 > /("IP security", see [RFC4301] and "Internet Key Exchange protocol version 2", > see [RFC7296] > /("IP security", see [RFC4301] and "Internet Key Exchange protocol version 2", > see [RFC7296])/ What change do you suggest, looks identical ? > suggestion: > all the Figures (e.g., Figure 1,2...) should have a title for explanation Done in -16. > section 2, please update the last paragraph to reference RFC8174 to indicate > that lowercase versions of the keywords are not normative Done in -16. > Section 11 (Security Considerations) Since section 9.2 has described the > self-protection properties of ACP well, it may be useful in this section to > mention them as a whole. Hmm.. Didn't want to reiterate too much text that is already written out in the document, but instead inserted a reference to section 9.2 into the security section.
