Subject: [CGA-EXT] Comments on draft-ietf-csi-hash-threat-05

From: Tony Cheneau <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 18:06:13 +0100 (CET)

Hello Ana, Suresh and Sheng,

I've read your draft and find it is in a good shape.

However, in the following text, I have a small comment:

    extensions.  For example, an attack against the IP address extension
    would enable the router to advertize the changed IP prefix range,
    although, not broader than the prefix range of the parent certificate
    in the ADD chain.

RFC 3971 does not mandate the use of IP prefix range (or address) (it is 
a "should"). Maybe you could add "if used in the original certificate".

Also, can you update the following references ?
    [sig-agility]
               Cheneau, T., Maknavicius, M., Shen, S., and M. Vanderveen,
               "Signature Algorithm Agility in the Secure Neighbor
               Discovery (SEND) Protocol",
               draft-cheneau-csi-send-sig-agility-00 (work in progress),
               October 2009.

Regards,
 	Tony