IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-volz-dhc-relay-server-security-02 - Respond by Sep. 27

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Thu, 22 September 2016 21:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E81312B51E for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 WipLkuknPul3 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22c.google.com (mail-lf0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4405E12B6D7 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id l131so79082982lfl.2 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=QL6ACiik6/Z4tcz4KmL50uEzmaXsB0n7/BlT0NCpkQk=; b=qGWclzI3bOrdo181SBLFDl7dREUv6+gS4q83Ps+q/e2RswC+Ow/8xJWhP9SiPaMS5z fe5Gw1zUhELv6NxocyHY9FvZQUc+ynQ/QxyKiW0SFo9kXmQeW5J1tMRUwNQfy//YfBGi CJLQiE8eaIQY7uWf1yV/l5JmM3krt0uNZmwb1QLAvaG5CbgkmMSd0L+hAggVvKUVmwBq gUOktPqYv1eDkLZ/xOq8RTkGxuM1qxjcJQFzT6l/YBOe2NxdLytGjsOAISCE6x4wMWWV M5RyydChEsYLPwucCJIrbtERlMItsvoqTSKsJ6IoQDQQ6yW/2Yr2MAo1xw0yeNQ/Qgty DTUQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=QL6ACiik6/Z4tcz4KmL50uEzmaXsB0n7/BlT0NCpkQk=; b=G5nrkOTzxHEUShCQBKNSs5lbWaf8DfrZJmeyHQKCtYxC9MUZK4X4XJGYTe/N20+J94 WhQvDjas9uToFmQIvWQtk9+01qSkcY4hiVyFPgBL/f3FzXIVmqCkI588hZPms83o3Lnm zxQ+EC0uGE6vKj+9G/IVkLN8OxLOea5usde+QwRPxbMS173czXGqlqOM77WVQUhJAJQY 9R0Mdtvk8O/OxzIONQrvmsgg46A71eKExp4Ss+4f3ZahIE3DfVNTkL44oEH+tqeNmyHX U7S8waojqfsP091bGodeDjESlm2/nbiAawjuKxXZbKinQViymSpBolo2L7NUFo7O1Hwa jWFA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwP7J1NxVxgR6Axlu5dnYmbytIlZ6nKk4kp1asBonOucr1M/0Q8BA8NIB3YSyaIjFZP+0ZnGBFqOsLVIag==
X-Received: by 10.46.5.151 with SMTP id 145mr1780379ljf.64.1474579773842; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.25.217.93 with HTTP; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <12d26ed3-37c3-9b5d-cc81-08df9f78f28e@gmail.com>
References: <12d26ed3-37c3-9b5d-cc81-08df9f78f28e@gmail.com>
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:28:53 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPt1N1=a1NomBeiHHxmTFZ9unaBH6JFV7ViE6_EUorKqb=87mw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114a82fe9cfaf0053d1f5bd2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/ZAWZBmMZW5a06ESoqQUJ-2hje5c>
Cc: dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Adoption call for draft-volz-dhc-relay-server-security-02 - Respond by Sep. 27
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 21:29:43 -0000

I'm in favor of adopting this as a work item.   A quick review reveals that
perhaps the first paragraph of the security considerations section should
be deleted, since it's followed by quite a bit of text, and hence isn't
accurate.   Otherwise it looks good, but I should give it a more thorough
review.

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The idea for this draft came up during discussions related to DHCP
> privacy. This draft has been presented previously and got positive
> reception. It was discussed on the list. There are currently no IPR
> disclosures filled against this draft. Suresh raised an issue about the
> earlier version and authors believe it is addressed in -02. They also
> believe it is ready for adoption call. So here it goes:
>
> This message initiates two weeks long WG adoption call on:
>
> Title: Security of Messages Exchanged Between Servers and Relay Agents
> Authors  : Bernie Volz, Yogendra Pal
> Filename : draft-volz-dhc-relay-server-security-02.txt
> Pages    : 8
> Date     : 2016-09-08
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-volz-dhc-relay-server-security-02
>
> Substantive comments and statements of support for adopting this
> document should be directed to the mailing list. Editorial suggestions
> can be sent to the authors. Since Bernie is co-author, I will determine
> the consensus after Sep. 27th.
>
> Tomek
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email