Christer, thanks for your review. Valery, thanks for your responses. I entered a No Objection ballot. Alissa > On Dec 13, 2019, at 3:17 PM, Christer Holmberg via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review result: Almost Ready > > 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-ipsecme-qr-ikev2-09 > Reviewer: Christer Holmberg > Review Date: 2019-12-13 > IETF LC End Date: 2019-12-25 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: The document is well-written, and almost ready for publication. > However, I have a couple of minor comments that I would like the authors to > address. > > Major issues: None > > Minor issues: > > Q1: > > The Security Considerations lists IKEv2/IPSec algorithms that are not > considered quantum-resistant. However, that is not mentioned anywhere else. I > think it would be good to mention that in the Abstract and/or Introduction. > > Q2: > > Section 3 says: > > "If the responder does not support this specification or does not have > any PPK configured, then it ignores the received notification and > continues with the IKEv2 protocol as normal." > > I assume the ignoring of a non-supported notification and continuing with > normal IKEv2 is part of the IKEv2 specification. If so, I suggest to say add > something like: > > ", as described in RFCXXXX." > > Nits/editorial comments: > > Q3: > > The Security Considerations talk about the Grover's algorithm. Please add a > reference. > > > _______________________________________________ > Gen-art mailing list > Gen-art@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
