[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-ipsec-sctp-02.txt
I have two comments:
1. The formatting of the new ID_RECURSE is not yet defined, either in this
draft or in the DOI (RFC 2407). I feel that the internet draft itself must
include them explicitly--otherwise, interoperability of implementations can
not be guaranteed. In particular, the interent draft should show the
format used to list multiple "identities" within the payload of the
"ID_RECURSE": that is, does each individual ID entity carry its own "type"
and "length field". Stated differently, we need to specify the format for
what RFC 2407 calls the "Identification Data" to be carried within the
RECURSE_ID payload. (Of course, at some later date, the formats could be
moved from the draft into the DOI and then be referenced in later versions
of this draft.)
2. (Nit picking) The name "ID_RECURSE" implies recursion, which is not
used to construct this payload. I would suggest using a name such as
"ID_LIST", which is more indicative of how this new field would be used.
____________________________________________________
Charles A Kunzinger (kunzinge@us.ibm.com)
Network Processor Architecture & Solutions (Dept 8NJV)
Phone: Tie 444-4142, external 1-919-254-4142
Fax: Tie 441-3061, external 1-919-543-3061