Hi Russ,
thank you for your review. Please, see inline.
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review result: Not Ready
>
> I reviewed this document as part of the Security Directorate's ongoing effort
> to
> review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments were
> written primarily fo
Hi Antony,
> > Perhaps, it would be more clear if we also rename the two existing entries.
> > For
> example:
> >
> > Transform Type 5 - Anti-Replay Protection Transform IDs
> >
> > Number NameReference
> > 0 Used with 32-bit SN [RFC7296]
> > 1 Used with 64-bit ES
Valery:
I react to one response now. I'll look at the rest later.
>> IKEv2 implementers that have no need for group security associations are not
>> likely to read this document. For this reason, I think it is unwise to
>> include the
>> updates to RFC 7296 here that:
>>
>> (1) Rename transfo
Hi Russ,
> Valery:
>
> I react to one response now. I'll look at the rest later.
>
> >> IKEv2 implementers that have no need for group security associations
> >> are not likely to read this document. For this reason, I think it is
> >> unwise to include the updates to RFC 7296 here that:
> >>
Valery:
I do not think that RFC 9370 changes are the same as the ones we are discussing
here.
The point has been raised to the Area Directors at this point. I will accept
whatever they consider best.
Russ
> On Nov 29, 2024, at 2:08 PM, Valery Smyslov wrote:
>
> Hi Russ,
>
>> Valery:
>>
