IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Consultation on DRAFT Infrastructure and Services Vulnerability Disclosure Statement

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 05 August 2020 21:53 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF4C53A03EC; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 QW72Y6n1kLim; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 880303A0141; Wed, 5 Aug 2020 14:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1k3RLJ-000IqK-Rs; Wed, 05 Aug 2020 17:53:01 -0400
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 17:52:56 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>
cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Consultation on DRAFT Infrastructure and Services Vulnerability Disclosure Statement
Message-ID: <3A19F7796C556DEC8718B21A@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <84305B58-FE52-4C5D-854D-07672640D23C@ietf.org>
References: <159651200228.24262.1827308624474280314@ietfa.amsl.com> <20200805064757.GA23626@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <84305B58-FE52-4C5D-854D-07672640D23C@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/DVChkNi6pRfkTeNbv6TpL3cfArQ>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2020 21:53:05 -0000


--On Thursday, August 6, 2020 08:55 +1200 Jay Daley
<jay@ietf.org> wrote:

> I've added that as an issue in GitHub and I've asked the
> IESG for their view.
> 
> https://github.com/ietf-llc/infrastructure-and-services-vulner
> ability-disclosure-statement/issues/6

Jay,

This is another aspect of the issue I raised in my previous
note.  Unless I have misunderstood something very fundamental,
the IESG has no special role here.  Certainly you can ask anyone
(inside or outside the community) for their views, including
that particular collection of people.  But I believe that any
comments should go to this list and be public and (Randy's
friend notwithstanding) attributable, not something provided to
you for your interpretation and action.

   john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email