Subject: [MSEC] GKM Comments

From: Brian Weis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:32:24 -0700

Draft draft-ietf-msec-gkmarch-06.txt looks good to me! I have just a few
minor comments:

1. Use of "MSEC". In the Abstract and Section 1.0 you define MSEC as
"multicast security" rather than referring to the MSEC WG. I think
that's a good idea, since the MSEC WG will be gone someday whereas
Informational RFCs last forever! But there are other references to
"MSEC" in the document which seem to imply the WG. E.g., 4th paragraph
in section 1.0 talks about "MSEC literature". I'd suggest omitting or
rewording those. 

2. Appendix 1. This is related to comment 1. Do you really want the
document to list the the MSEC WG roadmap in perpetuity?

3. Section 5.1. This listing of rekey protocol goals is nice, but I
couldn't help wondering why there wasn't a similar list of goals for the
registration protocol?

Brian

-- 
Brian Weis
Strategic Cryptographic Development, ITD, Cisco Systems
Telephone: +1 408 526 4796
Email: [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
msec mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/msec

---

From: "Lakshminath Dondeti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 13:10:09 -0400

Brian,

Many thanks for the review and comments.  I will address them in detail 
in the next few days.

After that, we will revise and resubmit before the Oct 27th deadline.

regards,
Lakshminath