Re: [Perc] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel-08

"Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> Tue, 08 June 2021 02:49 UTC

From: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, perc@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 02:49:28 +0000
Message-Id: <em9ea9177b-4d17-4049-bec1-d31b4fa4874f@sydney>
In-Reply-To: <162221496687.14173.2319711463541729432@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <162221496687.14173.2319711463541729432@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
User-Agent: eM_Client/8.2.1237.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MB2B5A6E2A-E3C6-49A4-B822-ED1E31EF742E"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/perc/wMtyzbOMqZvoa1sg6JNo570drFw>
Subject: Re: [Perc] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel-08
Precedence: list

Russ,

Thanks for the review.  I have made changes as you (and Shawn) 
suggested.  Please see this diff which contains a rewritten security 
considerations section.  Please feel free to comment further since it's 
quite possible that I created more confusion.

I also tried to address your question about the mutual authentication in 
the security considerations section.

https://github.com/percwg/perc-wg/compare/paulej_ietf_lc

Paul

------ Original Message ------
From: "Russ Housley via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel.all@ietf.org; last-call@ietf.org; 
perc@ietf.org
Sent: 5/28/2021 11:16:06 AM
Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel-08

>Reviewer: Russ Housley
>Review result: Almost Ready
>
>I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
>Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
>by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
>document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
>
>For more information, please see the FAQ at
><http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
>Document: draft-ietf-perc-dtls-tunnel-08
>Reviewer: Russ Housley
>Review Date: 2021-05-28
>IETF LC End Date: unknown
>IESG Telechat date: unknown
>
>Summary: Almost Ready
>
>
>Major Concerns:
>
>Section 9:  The document has two different types of keying material:
>    (1) keys for hop-by-hop encryption and authentication; and
>    (2) keys for end-to-end encryption and authentication.
>The first two paragraphs of Section 9 talks about these two types of
>keying material.  I think that the discussion should be expanded by a
>sentence or two to explain the security consequences of disclosure of
>each of theses keying material types.
>
>In addition, a pointer to the very extensive Security Consideration in
>RFC 8871 would he helpful.
>
>
>Minor Concerns:
>
>Section 5.4 says: "Each TLS tunnel established between the media
>distributor and the key distributor MUST be mutually authenticated."
>Is this a requirement to use DTLS client authentication?  If so,
>please be explicit.  If not, what other mechanisms for authentication
>are expected?
>
>
>Nits:
>
>Section 5.1, paragraph 2:   s/[!@RFC4566]/[RFC4566]/
>
>Section 5.5, paragraph 1:
>   s/MUST utilize the same version/MUST contain the same version/
>
>Section 8, last paragraph:
>    s/section 4.8 if [!@RFC8126]/Section 4.8 of [RFC8126]/
>
>Section 9, paragraph 1:
>   s/keying material This does/keying material. This does/
>
>
>

[Perc] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-perc… Russ Housley via Datatracker
Re: [Perc] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-… Paul E. Jones