Paul Hoffman wrote:
- One of the changes is listed in Section 1.7 twice. I'd suggest
combining
In section 1.3.2, changed "The KEi payload SHOULD be included" to
be "The KEi payload MUST be included". This also led to changes in
section 2.18.
and
Section 2.18 requires doing a Diffie-Hellman exchange when rekeying
the IKE_SA. In theory, RFC 4306 allowed a policy where the Diffie-
Hellman exchange was optional, but this was not useful (or
appropriate) when rekeying the IKE_SA.
as follows:
This document requires doing a Diffie-Hellman exchange when
rekeying the IKE_SA (and thus requires including the KEi/KEr
payloads). In theory, RFC 4306 allowed a policy where the
Diffie-Hellman exchange was optional (and KEi/KEr payloads could be
omitted), this was not useful (or appropriate) when rekeying the
IKE_SA.
Disagree. Where possible, I tried to list the actual sections where
changes were made, and your proposed rewording loses the two places.
The current text is more explicit than the proposed change.
Well, this depends on whether you think Section 1.7 should list
textual changes in the document, or clarification/changes to the
protocol.
IMHO, it should be the latter, but I see that currently it's really
listing the textual changes (even when they clearly don't have any
impact on the protocol); so perhaps listing these separately is
consistent with that...
Best regards,
Pasi
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf