Re: [core] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag-12: (with COMMENT)

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Tue, 16 February 2021 12:40 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91A8E3A0B20; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 04:40:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
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 f8j-E13OuY95; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 04:40:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E25B63A0B1D; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 04:40:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7488; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1613479246; x=1614688846; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=0RNnd9JV8ok9MbVbVaoGIXgI01VmzLk0ihktzbdgP9w=; b=jrdsrLUurSz6VUl9StTu39UMpPNfIzpqlTpdH3U6W2Jn55HKBhEv0LTb bU2BEepAQUf028Ck/whAYitna+J76SPm73/ziPU8bnNpScRP/7jCKoN9s FRptl2zRfoxI50uekMCXytY18qqnEdEAFvYQWwtX4owCsREXXA5IwaOYb 0=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 488
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,183,1610409600"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="31057661"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-4.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 16 Feb 2021 12:40:44 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp722.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp722.cisco.com [10.61.66.210]) by aer-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 11GCehwB001126 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:40:43 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <2CAA815D-7E90-4AAC-809C-C7208E6B41CA@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D1E09ACF-763C-404A-A1BB-F82E837B9BDF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha256"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\))
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 13:40:41 +0100
In-Reply-To: <161347761786.11909.15773072075789476433@ietfa.amsl.com>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag@ietf.org, core-chairs@ietf.org, core@ietf.org, Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca@ri.se>
To: Eric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
References: <161347761786.11909.15773072075789476433@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.60.0.2.21)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.66.210, ams3-vpn-dhcp722.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/-K_g1r9jJ2vmWtgyBgzMz7pw0Eg>
Subject: Re: [core] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 12:40:49 -0000

Hi everyone,

I’m not sure if it was lost, but the authors did address the questions I raised to my satisfaction.

Thanks to all.

Eliot

> On 16 Feb 2021, at 13:13, Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag-12: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-core-echo-request-tag/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Thank you for the work put into this document.
> 
> Please find below some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be
> appreciated).
> 
> Eliot Lear (in copy) has also reviewed the document as IoT directorate reviewer
> at:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-core-echo-request-tag-12-iotdir-telechat-lear-2021-02-05/
> So, please address/reply to his comment.
> 
> I hope that this helps to improve the document,
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -éric
> 
> == COMMENTS ==
> 
> -- Section 2.2 --
> "The Echo option value is a challenge from the server to the client..." Just
> wondering whether "echo" is the right choice for the option as it is too close
> to ICMP_ECHO_REQUEST, why not "challenge" ?
> 
> I would have expected some statements related to non-idempotent requests
> (generic statement) and then specific examples such as actuators.
> 
> -- Section 2.2.1 --
> Are the authors confident enough to state a minimum length of 1 octet ? If the
> intent of the document is to prevent replay attack, then I wonder whether one
> octet is enough... Unsure whether Section 5 (security considerations) addresses
> this issue correctly.
> 
> 
>