[Dots] Comments on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-00 --
"Russ White" <7riw77@gmail.com> Tue, 30 May 2017 01:28 UTC
Return-Path: <7riw77@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B604F1294C8 for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MARKETING_PARTNERS=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=gmail.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 DRhcv_vtl4qU for <dots@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22d.google.com (mail-wm0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22d]) (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 F40F812948A for <dots@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id d127so77661968wmf.0 for <dots@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=2tVRakmcRuq2dvLU24dJx4b/iQAkAjwiDrCpRndsLHU=; b=GQWe8T0RCEsm7zloCicd6nmVTv5NWaQYrWlEoktPIr0Ig595WqSUjsGZuWGaT26LK2 RPMg9+coyY/AqymYxiWMYYVwkkGUKAv0UVg0M4ANMS9C3AHFTkYKR1q60hCgbgO1jtXW 5mAgUaAQQDULvMcgTLk8WHnWTPj+XQVZMKazutcLig6F+VgK4eMIzz8llrzkgkgXH5Oz 6SNVa2aM+puTgf3ax2VTixfQWbzAhkjDnqxTRkBft8BT21slP8RGc877eqT4O4PFqGA+ zfqWo8Kf6RUcIaw0SYD1ELmeVAF7dE+j6+cJ9xYXoYo9F5URgHdM5+EYyej2T0ihG2ep DsXQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=2tVRakmcRuq2dvLU24dJx4b/iQAkAjwiDrCpRndsLHU=; b=hikyU8LAZw/wZnf3gL45fov3sMsEUVHpeaLH86ETRYpqjhWJnFfmUx9KrH5VARgsjF WW1036TdMzmPzbbZBs2TAni9Tk3Z0d2m13nCzZwEJcghqXNTkfJ69n7RUNyOoBVyIXPU oksHjx4cA3gtwher89sTr7CIpUsKPPBq+9C4nEdEsVvcuFWTtrhw9frRJSFzwtDfFU/W Uj+C+9LHJR3WOvwkEZyrwHRV50rmbuZqqMVwcFvy4gN0rDkdDD2aKmsljVQrw7RbugFg GaOFdqOLPqGwZwPFrNLQkWdbQuKLsD8Ky9r4VpEqwVGTnDa+6hlBThiZdxpTJg/Cd00o P5zA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBeWt/HV1YpPhEIxk8oW5jbuW9Vy0Y3FGD6Jp+9Y7lBUaQcgrst XW/npOUIwltXATo3
X-Received: by 10.80.214.215 with SMTP id l23mr14163555edj.147.1496107696263; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from RussOld (108-78-210-25.lightspeed.chrlnc.sbcglobal.net. [108.78.210.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f25sm5739026edf.36.2017.05.29.18.28.15 for <dots@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 29 May 2017 18:28:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: Russ White <7riw77@gmail.com>
To: dots@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 21:28:13 -0400
Message-ID: <02d501d2d8e4$02966700$07c33500$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdLY4/CYKTUvmBvkSVu0FQ+Vny6m1Q==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/JWILh-pUWbSLpifNUAhSefMYyd8>
Subject: [Dots] Comments on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-00 --
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 01:28:20 -0000
Y'all -- Below are some grammar thoughts, and some more substantial questions, on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-00. 😊 /r == An enterprise network has partner sites from which only legitimate traffic arrives and the enterprise network wants to ensure that the traffic from these sites is not penalized I assume, from this wording, that only "enterprise" networks may contain or deploy DOTS clients... :-) I would change this wording, and remove "enterprise" throughout the document. Enterprise and provider are long dead terms with no real meaning any longer, and hence not really useful. == The DOTS client uses DOTS data channel.. I think "The DOTS client uses a DOTS data channel..." or "The DOTS client uses the DOTS data channel..." == The DOTS client may submit to the DOTS server a collection of prefixes it wants to refer to by alias when requesting mitigation, to which the server would respond with a success status and the new prefix group alias, or an error status and message in the event the DOTS client’s data channel request failed (see requirement OP-006 in ... This seems pretty awkward -- maybe something like: The DOTS client may submit a collection of prefixes which it would like to refer to through an alias to the server. The server can respond to this request for an alias either with the alias name, or an error (see requirement OP-006... == the data channel is not expected to be constructed to deal with attack conditions. Might be better if the wording here were tightened up a bit, perhaps -- ...the data channel is not expected to reliably transfer information under all possible attack conditions. Or some such -- though this is somewhat contradicted by the following sentence, which says the data channel should be based on a connection oriented transport (TCP), in order to prevent data loss. If TCP is the required transport, then it seems the bits about the data channel being able to lose data might want to be taken out of the document.