802.15.9ma to NesCom Bob Heile Chair, IEEE802.15 July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom Bob Heile Chair, IEEE802.15 Bob Heile

July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.3 Comments Revision: Standard for Transport of Key Management Protocol (KMP)  PAR 5.2, Scope — The new scope reads more like the need for the project or the project purpose would read if it were an amendment project.  It is not of the quality of the previous Scope statement.  Recommend deletion of first sentence (the last sentence makes the point).  Replace “Additionally it” with “This Standard”.  Add any additional description on what the revised standard will contain.  The Scope should not contain “may be added” statements, delete the “New KPM…” sentence. Revised: 802.11 had a similar comment. Suggested 802.11 language accepted except for one word (see response to 802.11) 5.3, Dependence on other projects — The question is not answered. Question answered as NO 5.5, Need — Replace the last sentence with: “This revision will address the above deficiencies.”  Replaced with “This revision addresses the above deficiencies” Bob Heile

802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.3 Comments(p.2) July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.3 Comments(p.2)  6.1.b, Registration activity — The current recommended practice contains registration activity (OUI, CID, and Ethertype specifications, reference to IANA Dragonfly registry, and has the KMP registry of Table E.1 where the standard itself is the registration authority).  Therefore, the answer to this question should be yes.  If no significant changes are expected in the revision, that can be added to the explanation. Accepted: Changed answer to YES and included the following in the explanatory box: “The current recommended practice contains registration activity (OUI, CID, and Ethertype specifications, reference to IANA Dragonfly registry, and has the KMP registry of Table E.1 where the standard itself is the registration authority).  At this time, no significant changes are expected in the revision.” Bob Heile

802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.3 Comments (p.3) July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.3 Comments (p.3) CSD The project number in the Title field of the 802.15 document header does not agree with the number on the PAR. ACCEPTED: Fixed 1.2.4, b, Technical Feasibility — “802.1x" should be “802.1X”. ACCEPTED: Fixed 1.2.5, c, Installation Cost — The answer about “manufacturing” is non-responsive to installation.  Perhaps leverage the answer to Balanced Cost would be appropriate, e.g., existing equipment may be upgradable via firmware upgrade, and installation costs would not vary from current products implementing the recommended practice. ACCEPTED: Replaced answer with: Existing equipment may be upgradable via firmware upgrade, and installation costs would not vary from current products implementing the recommended practice. Bob Heile

July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.11 COMMENTS: 5.2 Scope: The Scope statement should describe what will be in the final standard, and not the process of getting there. This statement is similar to a need statement. Please revise. Suggested revision: This standard defines security key management extensions to address session key generation (both 128-bit and 256-bit key lengths), the creation and/or transport of broadcast/multicast keys, and security algorithm agility. New Key Management Protocols (KMPs) are defined considered as part of this Standard. This standard maintains backwards compatibility with IEEE Std 802.15.9-2016. Accepted except for the one word noted above Bob Heile

July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.11 Comments: 5.5 Need: - Change “802.15.12 draft Standard” to “IEEE P802.15.12” if it is a draft standard, or change to “IEEE Std 802.15.12” if completed. Accepted 5.5 Need – Change “IEEE 802.15.4y draft amendment” to “IEEE P802.15.4y” if it is a draft amendment or “IEEE Std 802.15.4y” if completed. Either way it should not call out “draft amendment”: Accepted 5.3 completion of another standard: need to respond to dependence question – because of this statement, we believe you have a dependency “the IEEE 802.15.4y draft amendment for Security Next Generation is adding support for 256-bit key lengths”. Question answered as NO. 4y is dependent on 15.9ma Bob Heile

802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.11 Comments: CSD: July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom 802.11 Comments: CSD: Note the title of the CSD does not match the PAR – “802.15.9ma”. Fixed 1.2.1 b) change IEEE 802.15.9 to “IEEE Std 802.15.9 “Fixed 1.2.3 change “802.15.4 standard” to IEEE Std 802.15.4” Fixed 1.2.4 change “IEEE 802.15.9 “ to “IEEE Std 802.15.9 “Fixed 1.2.4 change “IEEE 802.15.4y” in 2 locations to “IEEE Std 802.15.4y” Fixed 1.2.5 change “IEEE 802.15.9” in 2 locations to “IEEE Std 802.15.9“Fixed Bob Heile

July 2019 802.15.9ma to NesCom Motion: Approve forwarding 802.15.9 Revision 1 PAR documentation in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/19/15-19-0215-03-09ma-802-15-9ma-par-draft.pdf to NesCom, and Approve CSD documentation in https://mentor.ieee.org/802.15/dcn/19/15-19-0216-02-09ma-802-15-9ma-csd-draft.docx (WG, yes, no, abstain) Mover: Heile Second: Gilb Bob Heile