Subject: [CGA-EXT] Comments on draft-ietf-csi-sndp-prob-01.txt

From: Tony Cheneau <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 17:27:49 +0100 (CET)

Hello,

I've read draft-ietf-csi-sndp-prob-01.txt. I think the document is in a 
good shape. Still I have some small questions and comments.

- Figure 3, the box isn't drawn correctly (misaligned dashes)

- section 3.3:
Concerning the DAD issue on ND proxy, I think there might be a problem
too when there is a real collision. The node defending its address will
send a NA that might go thought the proxy. The proxy may not be
authorized to modify this NA if it is protected by SEND.
Does this make sense ? Or will this case never happen ?

- section 4.2.5: s/are are/are/

- section 4.2.6:
    Movement between segments could be controlled with increasing
    certificate sequence numbers and timestamps.  The timestamp of the
    root authority (in this case, the CGA address owner) would be most
    significant.  Where ties exist, the shortest chain would supercede,
    as this would indicate a proxy closer to the proxied node.

I don't understand the first sentence. Can you detail ? (Are you referring to
serial numbers ?)

Regards,
 	Tony Cheneau