Tuomas Aura: CURRENT TEXT: Section 6.2.5: "All requirements 
listed in Section 6.2.1 are fulfilled." Section 6.2.6: 
"All requirements listed in Section 6.2.2 are 
fulfilled."

PROBLEM: This is too vague. What are the requirements 
is 6.2.1/6.2.2? I would not know what code to write 
for this.

PROPOSAL: List explicitly the things that the 
router/host needs to check (rather than referencing 
Sections 6.2.1/6.2.2). 

---------------

Jari Arkko: I agree with almost everything you have commented, but I'm
not sure about this one. We actually did have an explicit list of
checks in a previous version of the draft, but there were complaints
of redundancy and this was one of the things that got simplified.

I would note that there are explicit values listed for various fields,
as well as keywords dictating the contents of the fields in more
complex cases. Is there some specific check that you are missing?

---------------

Tuomas Aura: I guess the real answer is that there aren't any
important checks: it is the validness of the certificate chain that
matters, not the way in which the certificates are discovered.

Perhaps the text in 6.2.5 could be changed as follows:

   A router MUST silently discard any received Delegation Chain
   Solicitation messages that do not conform to the message
   format defined in Section 6.2.1. The contents of the Reserved 
   field, and of any unrecognized...

That is, delete the bullets altogether. Section 6.2.6 could be
changed similarly. This way, the reader will not start to think 
that there are some security-critical checks hidden somewhere 
(as I mistakenly did).

---------------

Jari Arkko: Ok. I had actually already something like this due to an
earlier issue which removed the other item from the bullet list. But
your wording is better.

---------------