AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna-10

"Ben Campbell" <[email protected]> Wed, 24 Jun 2015 15:16:49 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.xmpp
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

Here is my AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-xmpp-dna-10. I have a few minor 
comments, but nothing that needs to delay the last call.

Thanks!

Ben.
-------

-- Section 4.1:

Does the "(Section 4.3: No Mutual PKIX authentication)" belong where it 
is, or before the first dialback assertion?

-- 4.3, step 6:

Do I understand correctly that this step involves A sending a valid and 
trusted server cert, when it was previously unable to send a valid and 
trusted client cert? Is that a reasonable assumption? Whether yes or no, 
does it deserve a mention in the text? (It's likely I am missing 
something that should be obvious.)

-- step 7:

The reference to xep-0344 is informative. Should it be normative? If 
not, then perhaps a stronger mention of skipping subsequent steps should 
be included here? (it’s only mentioned in terms of the reference.)

-- 4.4.1, steps 3 and later:

The text says that A sends an initial stream header to B. Should that be 
considered B or C for the rest of the flow? I guess in the example, 
B==C, but is that required? (perhaps B and C coordinate dialback keys?) 
Maybe it doesn't matter from A's perspective.

_______________________________________________
xmpp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp