Archive

Re: [DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13

Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net> Mon, 04 November 2019 03:54 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <157100555733.20750.5488529297693995498@ietfa.amsl.com> <CALypLp9+j9pAMdhOJKfFoQrC_4joi7_Mcx0AP04aWb3Wob=NwQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALypLp-zhYdr1cpQJho_v1wO=K8UM40LGe0k5QqNg6BSsXuGdg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALypLp-zhYdr1cpQJho_v1wO=K8UM40LGe0k5QqNg6BSsXuGdg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joseph Salowey <joe@salowey.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:54:09 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOgPGoBU4iQErR48_C6RqHF=-SWCwQUgSZYn0earWsgBuFEcNw@mail.gmail.com>
To: CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
Cc: secdir <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring.all@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, dmm <dmm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000038335805967d4542"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmm/42IlZBLdsgmlsiKNqXH9hb9Rf6c>
Subject: Re: [DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13
Precedence: list

Hi Carlos,

THanks for addressing my comments.  I don't have any further issues with
the document.

Cheers,

Joe

On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 5:06 AM CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
wrote:

> Dear Joseph,
>
> We've just posted a new revision (-14) addressing all your comments.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Carlos
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 1:12 PM CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <
> cjbc@it.uc3m.es> wrote:
>
>> Dear Joseph,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the review. We will improve the security consideration
>> section by including also some of the considerations mentioned in draft-
>> ietf-dmm-deployment-models-04, and also by better scoping current text.
>> We believe we don't need much more in terms of text, as the document is
>> informational, and the actual security mechanisms for a distributed
>> anchoring solution would depend on the specifics of that solution. We can
>> also better reflect that rational in the text.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:25 AM Joseph Salowey via Datatracker <
>> noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Reviewer: Joseph Salowey
>>> Review result: Has Issues
>>>
>>> I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
>>> ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
>>> IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
>>> security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
>>> these comments just like any other last call comments.
>>>
>>> The summary of the review is the document has issues with the security
>>> considerations section.
>>>
>>> The security consideration section is extremely light.  It mainly
>>> contains text
>>> from RFC 7333.  It seems that there should be more discussion of
>>> security as it
>>> relates to the different configurations and different cases.   Do each
>>> of these
>>> cases have the same security properties and require the same types of
>>> security
>>> controls?
>>>
>>> Are the IPSEC recommendations mentioned in the security considerations of
>>> draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models-04 applicable for all the cases?
>>>  Should
>>> these be pointed out in the security considerations section?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Special Issue "Beyond 5G Evolution":
>> https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics/special_issues/beyond_5g
>>
>>
>
> --
> Special Issue "Beyond 5G Evolution":
> https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics/special_issues/beyond_5g
>
>

[DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dmm-d… Joseph Salowey via Datatracker
Re: [DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-d… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
Re: [DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-d… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
Re: [DMM] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-d… Joseph Salowey