Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-babel-dtls-05

[Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Dan, thanks for your review. David, thanks for the update. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa

On Jun 25, 2019, at 3:19 PM, David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks Dan. I've pushed a commit with your suggestions:

https://github.com/jech/babel-drafts/commit/8d6a6fc05ce4c621b38d2c7621c4157300380078

We'll upload -06 at the end of this round of comments.

David

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:41 AM Dan Romascanu <dromasca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks for the quick reply.

See in-line.

regards,

Dan

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:29 PM David Schinazi <dschinazi.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello Dan, and thanks for your review. Comments inline.

1. In section 2.1:

> The default port
   for Babel over DTLS is registered with IANA as the "babel-dtls" port
   (UDP port TBD, see Section 4), and the port exchanging unencrypted
   Babel traffic is registered as the "babel" port (UDP port 6696).

A reference would be desirable here.

What reference do you have in mind? This paragraph already has a

reference to Section 4 (IANA Considerations).

the section in the Babel spec that defines the "babel" port (UDP port 6696, see ....)

 

2. In section 2.4

> Nodes MUST silently ignore any unprotected
   packet sent over unicast.  When parsing an unprotected packet, a node
   MUST silently ignore all TLVs that are not of type Hello.  Nodes MUST
   also silently ignore any unprotected Hello with the Unicast flag set.

Is the last sentence necessary? Is this case not covered by the statement in
the first sentence?

The Unicast flag is a bit in the Babel packet. This statement instructs nodes

to ignore a Hello TLV which was received over multicast but has the unicast flag set.

Thanks for the clarification.

Thanks,

David

 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art