secdir review of draft-snell-atompub-bidi-06, part II
"David Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net> Wed, 16 April 2008 18:03 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8F943A6CAA; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:03:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C663A6AFA for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J5bDuq44OtDh for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.32]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E70643A6F8E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from OMTA14.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.60]) by QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id EEis1Z00D1HpZEsA30Ag00; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:01:40 +0000
Received: from Harrington73653 ([66.122.107.58]) by OMTA14.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id EJ3k1Z00F1Fdc9e8a00000; Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:04:14 +0000
X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=XLp1BURQL3cA:10 a=0u-k16FMayQA:10 a=_f535kyXYEkyxVEQ0yEA:9 a=r5wN35i7N_d-3XMqzk8A:7 a=BC-Sc4j_xKmFY5ugRcfR3m8o-kUA:4 a=si9q_4b84H0A:10 a=hPjdaMEvmhQA:10 a=50e4U0PicR4A:10
From: David Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, 'Tim Polk' <tim.polk@nist.gov>
Subject: secdir review of draft-snell-atompub-bidi-06, part II
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:03:41 -0700
Message-ID: <012801c89fec$3ca73b30$5e0a0a0a@china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
thread-index: Acif5ghDpjog4jcwSyeb99ZJOS5BagABPchQ
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Hi, I did a secdir review of this document to alert the SEC ADs to any new security considerations. Something I did not add to my review was a non-security concern. Why was the secdir asked to review this non-WG document? Or, more accurately, why is this topic not being handled as a WG item? I think this is something the SEC ADs should be considering as well. David Harrington dbharrington@comcast.net ietfdbh@comcast.net dharrington@huawei.com _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- secdir review of draft-snell-atompub-bidi-06, par… David Harrington