Subject: [Mip6] Submission of I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec-04.txt to IESG

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:18:53 -0600

The MIP6 WG I-D "Mobile IPv6 Operation with IKEv2 and the revised
IPsec", I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec-04.txt has completed WG last
call and has been revised following the comments received.
It is ready for AD review and forwarded through the IETF process for
publication.

Intended status for this I-D: Standards track

1) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the ID and do
   they believe this ID is sufficiently baked to forward to the IESG
   for publication? 

Yes.

2) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members and
   key non-WG members? Do you have any concerns about the depth or
   breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

The I-D has been reviewed sufficiently by WG members as well as
experts in the area of IPsec and security.

3) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
   particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
   complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)? 

No. The document does not need further reviews.
   
4) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
   you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of? For example,
   perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the document,
   or whether there really is a need for it, etc., but at the same
   time these issues have been discussed in the WG and the WG has
   indicated it wishes to advance the document anyway.

There are no specific concerns with this document.
   
5) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document?  Does it
   represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others
   being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with
   it?

Strong WG consensus. Base MIP6 specs (RFCs 3775/3776) specified the
use of IKE (v1) as the means to establish the IPsec SA. This I-D is
specifying the use of IKEv2 for establishing the MN-HA IPsec SA.

6) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
   discontent?  If so, please summarize what are they upset about.

No.
   
7) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to _all_ of the
   ID nits?  (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html).

Yes. No Nits found. It has been run through the nits checker available
at the tools.ietf web site.
   
8) Does the document a) split references into normative/informative,
   and b) are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not
   also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state?
   (Note: the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with normative
   references to IDs, it will delay publication until all such IDs are
   also ready for publication as RFCs.)

Yes. 

9) For Standards Track and BCP documents, the IESG approval
   announcement includes a writeup section with the following
   sections:

   - Technical Summary

   This document describes Mobile IPv6 operation with the revised
   IPsec architecture and IKEv2.

   - Working Group Summary

   The document has been discussed in the WG at several IETF
   meetings. It has also been reviewed sufficiently by WG members as
   well as security experts. There is consensus in publishing this I-D
   as a proposed standard. This specification is required in view of
   IKEv2 becoming the revised mechanism for setting up IPsec SAs.

   - Protocol Quality

     - is the protocol already being implemented?

        Yes.

     - have a significant number of vendors indicated they plan to
       implement the spec?

       There are some vendors who have at least indicated that they
       will implement this spec.
  
     - are there any reviewers (during the end stages) that merit
       explicit mention as having done a thorough review that resulted
       in important changes or a conclusion that the document was fine
       (except for maybe some nits?)

       The acknowledgement section captures this adequately.

-Basavaraj

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6