Hi Reshad,
> On Feb 23, 2021, at 7:28 PM, Reshad Rahman wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to have an updated document when the gates reopen?
Yes, we will work on posting an updated draft once data tracker opens up on
March 8.
Thanks.
Mahesh Jethanandani
mjethanand...@gmail.com
From: Rtg-bfd on behalf of Mahesh Jethanandani
Sent: 23 February 2021 20:02
Top posting because I am obliged to use the web to view this and the result is
an unusable mess:-(
Two thoughts.
Several WG have tried to set up registries of suitable security algorithms and
have failed dismally (t
. org" ,
"draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numb...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: Shephered writeup for draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers
Hi Reshad,
I never really received this e-mail, till Sonal forwarded it to me.
You have to remove my name from the spam sender list 😊
Hi Reshad,
I never really received this e-mail, till Sonal forwarded it to me. Anyway,
here are our responses to the comments you have provided. Please see inline
with [mj].
> Hi Sonal, authors,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the document update. Main comments:
>
>
>
> Hash has been replaced by sym
mb...@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: Shephered writeup for draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers
Hi Reshad, Jeff,
Thanks very much for the review. We have posted a new version of the draft that
should address your concerns.
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-
Hi Reshad, Jeff,
Thanks very much for the review. We have posted a new version of the draft
that should address your concerns.
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers-07.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers/
Htmliz
It's been some time since I've reviewed the entire document, so this is
almost fresh for me as well. :-)
My comments largely follow Reshad's:
- I don't know what [S] is intended to be.
- The chains in the diagrams aren't necessarily clear. I think they're
intended to represent that you can wo
Hi,
Authors, thank you for addressing my comments in rev-06.
I believe there’s some room for clarification in Section 3.
Comments:
1. [0] states monotonically increasing sequence number but the sequence
number is actually in [S]
[A] states Authentication but the authentication format conta
