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

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Warren, 

Thank you for the comments. 

Went with almost all your rewording proposal. An example to illustrate the use of the tcp-flags will be added. 

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Warren Kumari via Datatracker [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Envoyé : mercredi 1 mai 2019 21:21
> À : The IESG
> Cc : [e-mail]; Roman Danyliw; dots-
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Objet : Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-28:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Warren Kumari 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:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Thank you for writing this - I found it useful and interesting.
> 
> I do have a few comments / suggestions to try improve the document further.
> 
> 1:  "In most cases, sufficient scale can be achieved by compromising enough
> end-hosts and using those infected hosts to perpetrate and amplify the
> attack."
> This is somewhat misleading - it sounds somewhat like the reflectors which
> get
> used for amplification attacks (e.g DNS servers) have been compromised.
> Perhaps
> "In most cases, sufficient scale can be achieved by compromising enough
> end-hosts or using amplification attacks" - in the grand scheme of things
> this
> isn't super important, but because it is so close to the beginning of the
> document it would be nice to set the tone correctly...
> 
> 2: "After discovering the RESTCONF API root, a DOTS client uses this value as
> the initial part of the path in the request URI, in any subsequent request to
> the DOTS server." The commas seem superfluous, and make reading this hard.
> 
> 3: "It is RECOMMENDED that DOTS clients and gateways support means to alert
> administrators about loop errors so that appropriate actions are undertaken."
> Truly a nit, but I had to reread this sentence multiple times before I got it
> -- I would suggest s/means/methods/ (or "provide methods").
> 
> 4: TCP flags. It is really common to match on "Established" sessions (or
> packets with or without the SYN flag -- I think it would be **really**
> helpful
> to describe how this is done / have an example, etc. While readers should be
> able to figure this out, it would be helpful to have this so people can find
> it
> in a panic. Actually, more examples in the Appendix would be generally
> useful...
> 
> 5: "The DOTS gateway, that inserted a ’cdid’ in a PUT request, MUST strip the
> ’cdid’ parameter in the corresponding response before forwarding the response
> to the DOTS client." Extra commas...
>