Re: [Insipid] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-insipid-logme-marking-12: (with COMMENT)

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Thu, 16 August 2018 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0178130DE7 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.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 ZwSZmReakoh1 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:20:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AB3912D949 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id y9-v6so4897025wma.5 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:20:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kumari-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zPqwAudnO5dqx062QD1ISiVJneL8Ne8l/ENe338OIi4=; b=dIOjtX9Qs9NjFiQ8fWJOIV//+ymAEva3n9Cd2Aui1jZ/4zn5TEox0aqR4MCTCvOmuK YAVuGkkgQX7gXUL0kHEEhxR2lhRbTTwtXz1OgUY0EafF8j0clre58Rz7S9t7YS/8V7A8 NQbkfo43HTU679RqRQo96xvnVG2qcDMZDZ1NTq1LKTNmtW9gSJSxiP3UurDfl34jh0v2 /M2idDQl3Q7SG6cGOJX6mXbm0tTcMp3aeBcPAG9D3aYI2BC3hiNnh68oRSgOsbKfZ2WJ 71f75c2KSK3bqXlp+51xEfsoMdRGkaJEbOh2kb9ICcrCqLJfIXk1N8ndc++5ZlsaodS4 yYIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zPqwAudnO5dqx062QD1ISiVJneL8Ne8l/ENe338OIi4=; b=gTnDmQJFhsWrVs2XldCNopPzhDGSJeSEO2sCylNn1lqmR1XBtIL490QUmgYiwnECKx e9Hg0qba9t4zNJXYPG4f8VQ8fPjNBOzLSRmWVOK2NmMeS8FWhG6V9QLOcq5SXpwcAkTu PZvlLZz+LQAtIOHcGLOxiwYcUDjkq311QNgwTPow+0pw+Lzu81Jb0vTHbKH0rQZUkzwW 6QSvgcEvbiezo4ZcUodWJ8oYe3ruNGizCFdv/JMbmK0cpU6egQGet86k2Q1X+PlN7lhT L9LuYXuKEHF4TtzGVm2Lve1LLiDDT0K/CipdnppYXRkLSXUDxxBEeMAMBN0xjviGYf0E 2JTA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHNWGoLbWQCr7wjPCpUx2ioNAjGNipGiHrF7Ov3vHPc+32rfiXn Wa7aEwEIkJPIKAQNgVGj8LzH2a6gB7VXqQfrTUODcQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPwTw3C4rd930zFvqyyXMmg7eAlkzjryUd50+NYsVbbQLMpRbR4y1Bo9OtTKdE9rmjFogUZmlfzBrht9R2YLWsU=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:87c9:: with SMTP id j192-v6mr15373711wmd.71.1534436428252; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <153426939480.27116.8218591880709971920.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E3AEB4C8-644E-421B-9A04-4D24E97F774E@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E3AEB4C8-644E-421B-9A04-4D24E97F774E@cisco.com>
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 12:19:51 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHw9_iKtMgTjPgzuAoDOUEG2P+RNa8jWkm2TY1hO5Y5sB5b6Cg@mail.gmail.com>
To: carunach@cisco.com
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-insipid-logme-marking@ietf.org, insipid-chairs@ietf.org, gsalguei@cisco.com, insipid@ietf.org, Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com, carunach=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/_l6xZF_SaYB8voJUwzjst994ryo>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Warren Kumari's No Objection on draft-ietf-insipid-logme-marking-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Session-ID discussion list <insipid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/insipid/>
List-Post: <mailto:insipid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 16:20:34 -0000

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:45 AM Arun Arunachalam (carunach)
<carunach@cisco.com>; wrote:
>
> Thanks Warren!
>
> Please see inline.
>
> > On Aug 14, 2018, at 1:56 PM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>; wrote:
> >
> > Warren Kumari has entered the following ballot position for
> > draft-ietf-insipid-logme-marking-12: 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-insipid-logme-marking/
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > COMMENT:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Thank  you for a clear and well written document.
> >
> > A rich version of this review is at:
> >
> > Thank you for a clear and well-written document.
> >
> > An HTML version of this review is at:
> > https://mozphab-ietf.devsvcdev.mozaws.net/D11687
> >
> > Line: 124
> > I'm uncomfortable with the "operators need to" wording -- perhaps "operators
> > often have to", or "operators are often expected to”?
>
> Sure. We will make this change.
>
> >
> > Line: 1555
> > The privacy implications of all of this seem large -- I think that it would be
> > really useful to make "Privacy" be its own section, and not a subsection of
> > Security Considerations.
> >
>
> We plan to make the content under "8.4 Privacy” as a separate section named “Section 9.0 Privacy Considerations”.
>

Awesome, thank you!
W

> Thanks!
> Peter & Arun
>
> >
>


-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf