Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC2/Telechat review of draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-24

Paul Giralt <pgiralt@cisco.com> Thu, 18 August 2016 00:20 UTC

Return-Path: <pgiralt@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 876C012D684; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.767
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.767 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 8QyeZiTP7_rG; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:20:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3B7B12D5CA; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5473; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1471479610; x=1472689210; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id: references:to; bh=qdOtPAO3kFXKCyKOFJNtt9fBr3HSFu/jI4j8VsYJxJY=; b=I25PJwmSlyjv+16cocjfVFD7bRCSBv5wfx19ruR3igFddCXPrHwgdzOM 8vra9pF+ulbq6FJuX4BGrAwmeqdhRpWxI+IlJ+GtLeSRWOJGNZiDPdIjr O3ZPKDtb/0UDIWfB0h0qzUzcFAgV9mvZ8PxGgzLFJWR9fROxsRbH3wEk1 8=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 842
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DGAgDa/bRX/4ENJK1egnZOgVKyVIUHg?= =?us-ascii?q?X2GHQKBbDgUAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4ReAQEEAWcSBQsLBBQuVwYTiCkIvgIBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEODoYqgXiCVYQcg1CCLwEEmUSDPotgj0mMO4N4HjaEF?= =?us-ascii?q?iAyhWiBRQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,536,1464652800"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="137047711"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 18 Aug 2016 00:20:10 +0000
Received: from rtp-vpn6-823.cisco.com (rtp-vpn6-823.cisco.com [10.82.251.58]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7I0K8dr016896 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:20:09 GMT
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A605B94E-3BBD-43BE-ADDF-62B69E7A0257"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail
From: Paul Giralt <pgiralt@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B9A67A12-B74D-47E6-B67A-6AEFE7BB1D74@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:20:08 -0400
Message-Id: <FC37CFCC-DF3E-4C26-94FB-3CB1174F8634@cisco.com>
References: <pe04eo7uwhsm1a1pyh3i0c7e.1471038202004@email.android.com> <B745A028-9B9B-4FA0-BA7B-8027A8BD349B@nostrum.com> <c2c91da2-41c9-0244-4214-cee853ef66d5@folly.org.uk> <B9A67A12-B74D-47E6-B67A-6AEFE7BB1D74@nostrum.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/eawki7O7yHYAUihj-NyyqRzUgAE>
Cc: General area reviewing team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Elwyn Davies <elwynd@folly.org.uk>, draft-ietf-insipid-session-id.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-art LC2/Telechat review of draft-ietf-insipid-session-id-24
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:20:12 -0000

> On Aug 17, 2016, at 6:26 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> wrote:
> 
>> Back to the current document:  I have reread s3 of RFC 7206 and there are some points that need to be sorted out:
>> 
>> - The term 'end-to-end' is given a slightly specialized meaning in RFC 7206.  This is presumably carried through to the draft under review, but the need to refer to the end-to-end definition is not mentioned in the draft.
>> 
>> - The use of 'session' as a shorthand for the specific meaning of 'communication session' defined in RFC 7206 ought to be emphasized within the draft since the shorthand in RFC 7206 is technically limited to the RFC (ok, this is somewhat nitpicking but easy to misinterpret.)
> 
> I agree with both of the above points. Authors?

These are fair points and can easily be addressed with some additional verbiage in Section 3.