Re: [Detnet] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-security-13: (with COMMENT)

[Ethan Grossman <[e-mail]>]

OK, so my proposal is now updated - we will remove Part 2 of the table as éric suggests, unless otherwise advised. 
Ethan.

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[e-mail]> 
Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 12:46 AM
To: [e-mail]; 'Alissa Cooper' <[e-mail]>; 'The IESG' <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 'Lou Berger' <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-security-13: (with COMMENT)

Ethan, WG,

I would not mind removing the part 2 (mining, blockchain, network slicing) of the figure 2: there is no context given in the document.

Regards

-éric

-----Original Message-----
From: iesg <[e-mail]> on behalf of Ethan Grossman <[e-mail]>
Organization: Coast Computer Design
Reply-To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Date: Saturday, 9 January 2021 at 01:37
To: Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>, 'The IESG' <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, 'Lou Berger' <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-security-13: (with COMMENT)

    Hello Alissa (and WG - one open question below),
    Thank you for your comment. Regarding the table (figure 2 in section 6) we can certainly remove the blockchain and slicing columns. Regarding the utility of the whole table, this table was a contribution from a security industry professional, and I personally don't know the broad industry literature well enough to determine whether this form of table is of use to our readership, which is presumably security professionals, although perhaps this table is more oriented toward the business side than the technical side. 

    At this point I don't see any other review comments suggesting that the whole table be removed. I note your language in the comment "at a minimum" so I take this to mean that you don't feel strongly about removing the whole table. 

    So this table is close to being voted off the island, but it hasn't happened yet;  if anyone else wants to see it dropped, please speak up, otherwise it stays. 

    Sincerely,
    Ethan (as Editor, DetNet Security draft)

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <[e-mail]> 
    Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 6:38 AM
    To: The IESG <[e-mail]>
    Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Lou Berger <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
    Subject: Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-detnet-security-13: (with COMMENT)

    Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
    draft-ietf-detnet-security-13: 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-detnet-security/



    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    COMMENT:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I did not have time to review this document in detail but I looked at the Gen-ART review and it seems that most of the points have been addressed, thanks. I agree with other ADs that the tables in Section 6 do not make much sense or add much value. At a minimum the block chain and networking slicing columns should be removed as they are provided with no explanation and do not seem to belong with the other columns.