Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sidr-slurm-06

Request Review of draft-ietf-sidr-slurm
Requested rev. no specific revision
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2018-02-21
Requested 2018-02-07
Other Reviews Rtgdir Telechat review of -06 by IJsbrand Wijnands
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Francis Dupont
Review State Completed
Reviewer Daniel Migault
Review review-ietf-sidr-slurm-06-secdir-lc-migault-2018-02-20
Posted at
Reviewed rev. 06
Review result Has Nits
Draft last updated 2018-02-20
Review completed: 2018-02-20



I have reviewed this document 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.

The summary of the review is Ready with nits:

•	section 1: Introduction

   However, an RPKI relying party may want to override some of the
   information expressed via putative TAs and the certificates

It seems that TA is being used for the first time here. The acronym
should be extended to ease the reading of the document. I am reading it 
as Trust Anchor.

•	section 2.  RPKI RPs with SLURM

   SLURM provides a simple way to enable RPs to establish a local,

It seems to me the acronym RP is used for the first time. It seems that 
it should be expanded to ease the reading of the document. I am reading it 
as Relaying Party.

•	section 6 Security considerations

I My reading is that the section catches the criticality of the SLURM 
files and that network operators are already familiar provisioning critical 
data. As such I believe the section is sufficiently clear.

•	whole document:

It seems that BGPSec, and BGPsec are used together. I believe this 
should be harmonized to BGPsec.