Re: [Gen-art] [Insipid] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-11

"Arun Arunachalam (carunach)" <carunach@cisco.com> Wed, 04 January 2017 17:53 UTC

Return-Path: <carunach@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 EEDCF1296A2; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:53:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.622
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, 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 l3A6CAwhAtIx; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:53:11 -0800 (PST)
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 2581012969F; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:53:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4360; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1483552391; x=1484761991; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=dNG+LhD5OiOIo8EsJezX/YOt8LM7hj+ZR5Di2Za0u2c=; b=RV7AOgH/HNNypuAaRPz1xRMMJhJBWDFBiGkz2+9ZeOUKf5zvRGusiuOX RwJ9HCULtzNsy60WHZnf6M4DDKbh5NFhN1ph70XOp2uzUwrx7FDBz77OK bR5/gRMlZaE3iQ+wnFvC8z+ikm0N1IGMvIMCjwQDRW6XuLGKmdVcqkJqL Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AVAQBTNm1Y/49dJa1eGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgzgBAQEBAR9fgQwHjVCUR4d+jSSCCB8LhS5KAhqBPD8UAQIBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBYyiEaAEBAQMBAQEhEToLBQsCAQYCFAQCAiYCAgIfBgsVEAIEDgWIVQMQC?= =?us-ascii?q?A6ReJ1NgiWHPw2CXQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgQuHPIJfgk6EfS2?= =?us-ascii?q?CMQWaUTgBhlWGcYN6gXaFCIlbiXWISgEfOIErLg4BhVRyhyWBDQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,459,1477958400"; d="scan'208";a="188400189"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Jan 2017 17:53:03 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (xch-rcd-013.cisco.com [173.37.102.23]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v04Hr3ul003527 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:53:03 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) by XCH-RCD-013.cisco.com (173.37.102.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 11:53:02 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com ([173.36.7.25]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 11:53:02 -0600
From: "Arun Arunachalam (carunach)" <carunach@cisco.com>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Insipid] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-11
Thread-Index: AQHSZdOzWxg3IqmLzEyw43rvylRZSaEo/7YA
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:53:02 +0000
Message-ID: <16B3F47D-2E14-4F2A-B99B-CF309474DB20@cisco.com>
References: <4d11bb6c-c286-0e56-282a-4003fc518eab@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4d11bb6c-c286-0e56-282a-4003fc518eab@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.150.54.0]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <2750847D1597944992A6F480452EE92C@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/nf4H5-8yhIPTc8uyPDh0LDG1Vnc>
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, "Arun Arunachalam \(carunach\)" <carunach@cisco.com>, "insipid@ietf.org" <insipid@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [Insipid] Genart LC review: draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-11
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: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:53:13 -0000

Hi Stewart,

Thanks for taking the time to review !

Please see inline and let us know your input.


> On Jan 3, 2017, at 10:11 AM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-11
> Reviewer: Stewart Bryant
> Review Date: 2017-01-03
> IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-13
> IESG Telechat date: unknown
> 
> Summary: Ready with minor issue
> 
> This is a well written document that describes a useful feature in
> its intended purpose. However I could not help but think that it has
> an inevitable alternate use in the observation of users. There is
> guidance on how to prevent this, but that seems easily ignored. Thus
> the guidance from Security Area review will be of particular importance.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> None.
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> 6.1.  Trust Domain
> 
>   Since a "log me" marker may cause a SIP entity to log the SIP header
>   and body of a request or response, the "log me" marker SHOULD be
>   removed at a trust domain boundary.
> 
> 
> SB> I am not convinced that SHOULD is strong enough given that the traffic
> SB> is leaving the trust domain.

We can change from SHOULD to MUST.



> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> 
> 3.1.  Network Boundary
> 
>   Figure 2 shows a network boundary between GW-A1
>   in operator A's network and the SBC in operator B's network.  A
> 
> SB> SBC needs expanding on first use.


We will change it to “…and the Session Border Controller (SBC)…”.

> 
> ===================
> 
>   [RFC5853] gives examples of manipulating signaling to prevent the
>   sending network passing on sensitive information, for example
>   topology hiding, or the receiving network protecting itself from
>   signaling that is not under its control, for example protocol repair.
> 
> SB> The last sentence does not scan well.


We can rewrite this paragraph as follows:
   
   Topology hiding and protocol repair (see [RFC5853]) are two common 
   functions that manipulate signaling at the network boundary. These 
   functions are performed by SIP device types  (see [RFC7092]) such as
   Session Border Controller and Interconnection Border Control Function (IBCF).
  

> 
> ===================
> 
>   o  REQ9: The "log me" marker mechanism SHOULD allow a SIP
>      intermediary to request logging SIP requests and responses on
>      behalf of the originating endpoint.  The typical use case for this
>      requirement is for compatibility with UAs that have not
> 
> SB> UA needs expanding on first use.

We will change it to “….with User Agents (UA) that have not …"

Thanks!
Arun

> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> insipid mailing list
> insipid@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid