Subject: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-capability-negotiation-10.txt

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 13:52:08 -0400

I have reviewed this I-D as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

I performed this re-review by examining a diff between versions 9 and 
10 of the I-D, and by reviewing my comments on version 9.

I thank the author for having made a number of changes based on my 
review comments. He paid closer attention to where the word "only" is 
placed in sentences. I note that some newly added text repeats the 
previous placement errors re this word :. He also fixed the IPsec 
misspelling. There are still a few typos in this version, but I 
expect the RC Editor will fix them.

The author added text to include a DTLS-SRTP example, in addition to 
the MIKEY examples. (I'm not sure that its appropriate to retain the 
MIKEY examples at all here, but I defer to the RAI AD's judgment on 
this matter.)

The author revised the discussion of RFC 4474 to indicate that it is 
still PKI-based, but that the required PKI is less extensive (and 
thus potentially more viable) than a PKI that must encompass all end 
users. He also corrected the discussion to note the residual MITM 
attack potential if TLS or IPsec are used for hop-by-hop protection.

The author also revised the advice to implementors re DoS attacks, 
making the advice a "must" vs. "MUST."

The reference to section 3.10 in the security considerations 
discussion of DoS is still wrong; the reference should be to 3.11.