[Hipsec] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-11: (with COMMENT)
"Kathleen Moriarty" <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 13 September 2016 19:22 UTC
Return-Path: <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietf.org
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02CF12B4F2; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:22:41 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kathleen Moriarty <Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.33.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <147379456167.25378.17070605132907462726.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:22:41 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/aDztX2J6fvGqoFrvIQn-U05Vw6Q>
Cc: draft-ietf-hip-multihoming@ietf.org, hipsec@ietf.org, hip-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [Hipsec] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:22:42 -0000
Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-hip-multihoming-11: 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-hip-multihoming/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm wondering if split-tunneling should be listed as a security consideration. I see the following in section 4.1 that might be used to help prevent split tunneling: In the outbound direction, as a result of SPD processing, when an outbound SA is selected, the correct IP destination address for the peer must also be assigned. Then also the entirety of section 4.3. I read this as split tunneling could be an issue in some circumstances depending on policy and it might be good to mention this in the security considerations section. Or let me know if I am missing some background that would prevent split tunneling so implementers don't need to be made aware of this consideration. Thanks.
- [Hipsec] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draf… Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: [Hipsec] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on … Tom Henderson
- Re: [Hipsec] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on … Kathleen Moriarty