Last Call Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07
review-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07-secdir-lc-kelly-2015-01-02-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 11)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2014-12-26
Requested 2014-12-18
Authors Rachel Huang, Varun Singh
Draft last updated 2015-01-02
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -07 by Tom Taylor (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Scott Kelly (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -07 by Tina Tsou (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Scott Kelly
State Completed
Review review-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07-secdir-lc-kelly-2015-01-02
Reviewed rev. 07 (document currently at 11)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2015-01-02

Review
review-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07-secdir-lc-kelly-2015-01-02

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.

Here’s the abstract:

   This document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report
   (XR) Block that allows reporting of post-repair loss count metrics
   for a range of RTP applications.

Prior to this mechanism, RTCP Sender Reports (SR)/Receiver Reports (RR) contain, among other things, the cumulative number of packets lost. That number doesn’t indicate the data successfully received, because the receiver can apply repair mechanisms to recover data. This document adds reporting for post-repair metrics.

The security considerations seem complete, but I have one nit. Here’s the first sentence:

   It is believed that this RTCP XR block introduces no new security
   considerations beyond those described in [RFC3611]. 

Who believes this? I would simply assert this (remove “It is believed that”), and if I wasn’t comfortable with that, I’d take that as an indication that more analysis is required.

—Scott