IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Dots] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28: (with COMMENT)

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Thu, 02 May 2019 07:44 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 BF3991202FB; Thu, 2 May 2019 00:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 bzPWARLPVgm8; Thu, 2 May 2019 00:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orange.com (mta134.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.70.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 584E2120145; Thu, 2 May 2019 00:44:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr04.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.68]) by opfednr20.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 44vnMb5NP2z1yqS; Thu, 2 May 2019 09:44:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme6.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.13.101]) by opfednr04.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 44vnMb4Yyxz1xpJ; Thu, 2 May 2019 09:44:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e878:bd0:c89e:5b42]) by OPEXCAUBM6F.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::c489:b768:686a:545b%23]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 2 May 2019 09:44:11 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>, "dots-chairs@ietf.org" <dots-chairs@ietf.org>, "dots@ietf.org" <dots@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHVALLXCEXnp9o0I0eINP8/E6LtpqZXdAGg
Date: Thu, 02 May 2019 07:44:11 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302EA68ABC@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <155677961624.2911.12192112207910183191.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <155677961624.2911.12192112207910183191.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.114.13.245]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/OxuejLcDMtBKGoxULl9kxQ241ko>
Subject: Re: [Dots] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 02 May 2019 07:44:16 -0000

Hi Adam, 

Fixed all these nits. 

Thank you. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Adam Roach via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@ietf.org]
> Envoyé : jeudi 2 mai 2019 08:47
> À : The IESG
> Cc : draft-ietf-dots-data-channel@ietf.org; Roman Danyliw; dots-
> chairs@ietf.org; rdd@cert.org; dots@ietf.org
> Objet : Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28: (with
> COMMENT)
> 
> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28: 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-dots-data-channel/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Thanks to everyone who worked on this document. Alexey covered all of my
> substantive comments, and I support his DISCUSS; I only have a few editorial
> nits to suggest.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ID Nits reports:
> 
>   ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one
>      being 5 characters in excess of 72.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> §3.4:
> 
> >  its own information (e.g., server names, literal IP addresses) is
> >  present in the "Via" header of a DOTS message it receives:
> 
> Nit: "...header field..."
> 
> >     header, the DOTS gateway MUST NOT forward the DOTS message.
> 
> Nit: "...header field..."
> 
> >  error-info:     <via-header> : A copy of the Via header when
> 
> Nit: "<via-header-field>...header field..."
> 
> >  o  Otherwise, the DOTS agent MUST update or insert the "Via" header
> >     by appending its own information.
> 
> Nit: "...header field..."
> 
> >  DOTS client domain SHOULD remove the previous "Via" header
> >  information after checking for a loop before forwarding.  This
> 
> Nit: "...header field..."
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email