Subject: [Gen-art] Fwd: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 15:48:55 -0500

FYI, I can't believe that I did this again.

Sorry Russ.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: 17 January 2013 13:49
Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04
To: [email-masked]

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at

<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-avtcore-srtp-encrypted-header-ext-04
Reviewer: Martin Thomson
Review Date: 2013-01-17
IETF LC End Date: 2013-01-17
IESG Telechat date: (if known)

Summary:  This document is clear, well-written and ready for
publication as proposed standard.

Minor issues:  I wonder if it is necessary to establish a registry for
the labels used in SRTP key derivation (k_e, k_s, k_he, k_hs, etc...).
 As unlikely as it seems, a collision in this space would be bad.

Nits/editorial comments:
S5: s/alternate/alternative/

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 16:17:52 -0500

I've reviewed the latest (-06) and it is equally ready.  (That is,
I've seen no changes as a result of this review.)