Re: [hybi] Fwd: Gen-ART last call review of draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10

"Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@commscope.com> Thu, 21 July 2011 03:37 UTC

Return-Path: <Martin.Thomson@commscope.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB48321F8B09 for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.555
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.555 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.044, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Wuw9rK20zLk for <hybi@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cdcsmgw01.commscope.com (fw.commscope.com [198.135.207.129]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57FC521F8B04 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 20:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 0a0404e8-b7c24ae000002adb-63-4e279ef7bd81
Received: from ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com ( [10.86.20.103]) by cdcsmgw01.commscope.com (Symantec Brightmail Gateway) with SMTP id 31.04.10971.7FE972E4; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 22:37:27 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from CDCE10HC1.commscope.com (10.86.20.21) by ACDCE7HC2.commscope.com (10.86.20.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.159.2; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 22:37:15 -0500
Received: from SISPE7HC2.commscope.com (10.97.4.13) by CDCE10HC1.commscope.com (10.86.20.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 20 Jul 2011 22:37:14 -0500
Received: from SISPE7MB1.commscope.com ([fe80::9d82:a492:85e3:a293]) by SISPE7HC2.commscope.com ([fe80::58c3:2447:f977:57c3%10]) with mapi; Thu, 21 Jul 2011 11:37:12 +0800
From: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@commscope.com>
To: John Tamplin <jat@google.com>, "rbarnes@bbn.com" <rbarnes@bbn.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 11:37:11 +0800
Thread-Topic: [hybi] Fwd: Gen-ART last call review of draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10
Thread-Index: AcxHVaBBpr2q8lNtS8qs/P+dx2eZZAAACy2g
Message-ID: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F040D2C304E@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
References: <4E2792EB.2070408@stpeter.im> <CABLsOLCy3xAtXavSGc1mJA18Yhh7gZoaVX9Rg07Dyka1sNx0Tw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABLsOLCy3xAtXavSGc1mJA18Yhh7gZoaVX9Rg07Dyka1sNx0Tw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: "hybi@ietf.org" <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Fwd: Gen-ART last call review of draft-ietf-hybi-thewebsocketprotocol-10
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 03:37:16 -0000

> > [Why is masking necessary?]
...

To those providing responses to review comments like this, consider for a moment that perhaps the draft does not - and should - provide the answer.

You can pre-empt the question by having clear and unequivocal reasons in the document itself.  Then you need only let it talk for you.
 
For this particular question, reasoning is included in the security considerations section, but not at the point that the mechanism is first encountered.  A forward reference would resolve this.

The same applies to some of the other comments (and responses).

Information on working group consensus is probably the only thing that needs to be communicated in review responses (though as a reviewer, I find those sorts of responses deeply dissatisfactory).

--Martin