[dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03
Stephen Farrell via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 29 November 2019 15:39 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dns-privacy@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dns-privacy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019081201E3; Fri, 29 Nov 2019 07:39:09 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stephen Farrell via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, dns-privacy@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.111.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <157504194893.4871.5551746255324168227@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 07:39:08 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dns-privacy/ZAQp_R5H4VBm_ZNZRaOmLcPlmt8>
Subject: [dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03
X-BeenThere: dns-privacy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: <dns-privacy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dns-privacy/>
List-Post: <mailto:dns-privacy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy>, <mailto:dns-privacy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 15:39:09 -0000
Reviewer: Stephen Farrell Review result: Ready I might not be the best reviewer for this one as I've read it a few times before. But anyway, I scanned the diff [1] with RFC7626 and figure it seems fine. The only thing that occurred to me that seemed missing was to note that while the new privacy analysis in 3.5.1.1 is already complex, many systems are mobile and hence an analysis that ignores that won't be sufficient. For a mobile device one really needs to analyse all of the possible setups, and hence it's even harder to get to a good answer. (It could be that that's elsewhere in the document but since I only read the diff, I didn't see it:-) Cheers, S. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=rfc7626&url2=draft-ietf-dprive-rfc7626-bis-03.txt
- [dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draft-ie… Stephen Farrell via Datatracker
- Re: [dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draf… Sara Dickinson
- Re: [dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draf… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [dns-privacy] Secdir last call review of draf… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dns-privacy] [secdir] Secdir last call revie… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] [secdir] Secdir las… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [secdir] Secdir last call revie… Sara Dickinson
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Sara Dickinson
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Christian Huitema
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Vittorio Bertola
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Sara Dickinson
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Rob Sayre
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: [dns-privacy] [Last-Call] last call review of… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [dns-privacy] [secdir] Secdir last call revie… Benjamin Kaduk