[dtn] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec-18: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 03 February 2020 11:17 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E49B12001B; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 03:17:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind_via_Datatracker?= <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec@ietf.org, Scott Burleigh <Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>, dtn-chairs@ietf.org, Scott.C.Burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov, dtn@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.116.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Message-ID: <158072863257.28637.8806505241822600245.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 03:17:12 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/5MZ_Sq7gI2CPYLLEsI3r8BSO9GE>
Subject: [dtn] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_Discuss_on_draft-ietf-d?= =?utf-8?q?tn-bpsec-18=3A_=28with_DISCUSS_and_COMMENT=29?=
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:17:12 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dtn-bpsec-18: Discuss

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-dtn-bpsec/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec 1.2 says:
"A sample security
   context has been defined ([I-D.ietf-dtn-bpsec-interop-sc]) to support
   interoperability testing and serve as an exemplar for how security
   contexts should be defined for this specification."
However I don't really understand how interoperability can be reached if there
is not at least one security context that is mandatory to implement in this
draft (especially as ietf-dtn-bpsec-interop-sc is expired for more than half a
year already)...?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use the updated disclaimer in rfc8174.