Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing (take 2)

Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk> Tue, 10 September 2019 20:12 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
X-Original-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cdni@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463A912082E for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PKyRedlRiP05 for <cdni@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailex.mailcore.me (mailex.mailcore.me [94.136.40.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 831C21208AC for <cdni@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 13:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cpc93786-hari17-2-0-cust357.20-2.cable.virginm.net ([82.36.97.102] helo=[192.168.0.11]) by smtp03.mailcore.me with esmtpa (Exim 4.92.2) (envelope-from <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>) id 1i7mVP-0001bX-F3; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:12:52 +0100
From: Ben Niven-Jenkins <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
Message-Id: <6B1E8C4A-9C78-41E3-BBD0-406FD49494C3@niven-jenkins.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5DCA6BA4-DB8A-4F8C-9045-AD9777771E5E"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:12:50 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAMrHYE1o=uOT30dVuBpJXReoe7vVwGUrxRGdASS97PRmtZdFBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org>, "<cdni@ietf.org>" <cdni@ietf.org>
To: Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CAMrHYE1dDHFt8ahERpxt+sU6pK+QRcM12ffupCU2iNpG5rUK=w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMrHYE14_H243PpYfAq4y2hpc0-0WFwDghq289zvi=Ej8gyHZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABF6JR1ve2yX5Eyrpsu_bg9TiR-a0Y69RtRifebDhD1PZmOgeQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMrHYE2u4gbd19KwV7U0CjBjCyFuZ4aFkjdtQdepwALcVwAcqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABF6JR3RQkTWKkZsaiB3DjhfYSC-rQtimFChpV4ftgEh2TEX=A@mail.gmail.com> <CABF6JR0s1fHFRUvaz4DxetnnaGmHvayxEE8Ne_hM7ajG82ibuw@mail.gmail.com> <CAMrHYE1o=uOT30dVuBpJXReoe7vVwGUrxRGdASS97PRmtZdFBQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-Mailcore-Auth: 9600544
X-Mailcore-Domain: 172912
X-KLMS-Rule-ID: 1
X-KLMS-Message-Action: clean
X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Status: not scanned, license restriction
X-KLMS-AntiPhishing: not scanned, license restriction
X-KLMS-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Security 8.0 for Linux Mail Server, version 8.0.1.721, bases: 2019/09/10 12:16:00 #10224862
X-KLMS-AntiVirus-Status: Clean, skipped
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cdni/dyQSPH_5jbOT6S1EiwVhaS1MN3k>
Subject: Re: [CDNi] Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing (take 2)
X-BeenThere: cdni@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is to discuss issues associated with the Interconnection of Content Delivery Networks \(CDNs\)" <cdni.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cdni/>
List-Post: <mailto:cdni@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni>, <mailto:cdni-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 20:12:57 -0000

RFC7736 is an example (IMO) of providing useful, while not unnecessarily restrictive, guidance to the expert reviewer.

Something you may want to consider is that specification required does not require an RFC it just requires "the values and their meanings must be documented in a permanent and readily available public specification” and that the expert reviewer may need to review registrations after the closure of the CDNI working group and so relying on CDNI (or URI signing) expertise pre-reviewing the specification in an IETF WG or the IETF in general is not a given

Ben

> On 10 Sep 2019, at 18:52, Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Phil,
> 
>   I tend to agree that the expert reviewer should be able to do the right thing, and if the update comes via RFC, the WG will have vetted the usefulness of any new registration.  RFC8126 says "clear guidance to the designated expert should be provided when defining the registry", so I just wanted to make sure we don't have any specific guidance.  Metadata just uses a generic:
> 
>     "The Designated Expert will verify that new XXX definitions do not duplicate existing XXX definitions and prevent gratuitous additions to the namespace."
> 
> thanx.
> 
> --  Kevin J. Ma
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 3:52 PM Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <mailto:sorber@apache.org>> wrote:
> I've read into RFC8126 a little more and I don't think there needs to be anything more specific said for expert guidance. I'm fine with adding a paragraph to that effect as well. I think with the spec required, it's going to be fairly obvious what the use case is, and furthermore the expert shouldn't be needlessly restricted as they are indeed an expert. I don't think we need to make the barrier any higher for registration, and I don't think additions to the registry will be common. I'll note that in the paragraph as well. Thoughts?
> 
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 12:44 PM Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <mailto:sorber@apache.org>> wrote:
> I have updated with your comment.
> 
> Not sure what kind of additional guidance you are looking for. I'm open to the idea, but I'd need some example text to consider. Is there a document that you feel has done a particularly good job that I could reference?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 11:28 AM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
> 
>   For the IANA registry, I think you want to pattern it more like section 6.4, since this is creating a new subregistry, e.g.:
> 
>     The IANA is requested to create a new "CDNI URI Signing Verification Code" subregistry, in the "Content Delivery Networks Interconnection (CDNI) Parameters" registry.  The "CDNI URI Signing Verification Code" namespace defines the valid values associated with the s-uri-signing CDNI Logging Field.  The CDNI URI Signing Verification Code is a 3DIGIT value as defined in <ref>section 4.5</ref>.  Additions to the CDNI URI Signing Verification Code namespace will conform to the "Specification Required" policy as defined in [RFC8126].
> 
>     The following table defines the initial Verification Codes:
> 
>   Also, for the new registries, do we want to give any additional guidance to the expert reviewer as to what would make for a reasonable or unreasonable addition to each registry?
> 
> thanx.
> 
> --  Kevin J. Ma
> 
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 3:28 PM Phil Sorber <sorber@apache.org <mailto:sorber@apache.org>> wrote:
> https://github.com/PSUdaemon/URISigningSpec/pull/63 <https://github.com/PSUdaemon/URISigningSpec/pull/63>
> 
> Please confirm this was the intent of the comments.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 6:41 PM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
>   The WGLC has now closed.  There were no major objections.  We will address Chris's comments and move forward with submitting the draft.
> 
> thanx!
> 
> --  Kevin, Phil, and Francois
> 
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 1:46 AM Kevin Ma <kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:kevin.j.ma.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
>   Today will begin the two-week WGLC on: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing-18 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-cdni-uri-signing-18>
> 
>   Please send any comments, questions, or concerns to the CDNI mailing list: cdni@ietf.org <mailto:cdni@ietf.org>
> 
>  The WGLC will end on Wednesday August 7, 2019, at which time, assuming there are no objections, we will submit the draft to the IESG
> 
> thanx!
> --  Kevin, Phil, and Francois
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> CDNi@ietf.org <mailto:CDNi@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni>
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> CDNi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni