[Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations-03

神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp> Mon, 26 September 2016 16:34 UTC

Return-Path: <jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: int-dir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A1012B226; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 EjRKDqXY5xIo; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x229.google.com (mail-qt0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::229]) (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 C6E4012B320; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x229.google.com with SMTP id l91so83281128qte.3; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=jEQBAdlgAh/7Hs4uhH78z8r7o3/UpNCxoUhQ17/HtDU=; b=CQ35M58iirm9iQuG3KE7T2PBYBetNEkgNC3NPiYp/nh4mR86LV1g3KNv0gzHRaK3iv sAfSU485SEeHTWLSQK0oWtCaEpKfuX/aeH6K4qmVtJtW8bQmVWL20+O6qcXWyRFdOq96 zvJRqP2LqfUzmrxrqVDtc3gyV5HAf56Ltwd0HEB5WnBDeTkX4elweTbZfaxzb6UlbTjT 4VJNzw6NElx+iZR/Z65yEIe/EboxhF5RWhK07NufY8MZJXGHj+xSOlKBqEN0zreE7COn 4zEgWJFz3u9nGCrXVZI1jjyPysS4XZJRSPSwQ3QL7ZmF3aJLrYNK4tlkmkuaWTTCBwwa uJQA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to; bh=jEQBAdlgAh/7Hs4uhH78z8r7o3/UpNCxoUhQ17/HtDU=; b=MbWZfNOru2hdCfm2VE/cUvtXa59JbgsbKLtiZPaDnPEtLhGMGYmz/u/yOcZu+D4Muv hS+NC1rQdUBm47bX6lgeIPDS7QXyOLs6OzetNhRM1rnq+FkpdOTk9ORa0EWv6sR22T/R T1FAa4bwJfUeHoPXDPnYwiPxWTjEWPTY5/fKnd7xhFUSH1n+UrpZpRGyT42fEHRANXNw FxFRrY1GR1p+L8nprFObAYP1vDaYRvX9+2cd/qV731yfaQx6zDcI1a5mDfcQsfGzuQvn NNcoFSFZWfUHU6AX7wV6EwMrh3aQcH4LPxr6kSMFz4Xt8LqUGidgVQAw6zyPAuzUvs3+ NP/Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA6/9Rl1v6IZ6HlMo7e5sVI/Kn5PgOelCGZrUFe562+7iONC7boH0Bd7D8mJSsFqFS+n9YN0qpypUsz4i7wS0w==
X-Received: by 10.200.47.165 with SMTP id l34mr22521719qta.78.1474907666820; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jinmei.tatuya@gmail.com
Received: by 10.237.54.227 with HTTP; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: 神明達哉 <jinmei@wide.ad.jp>
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:34:26 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0blnDIRdPGmvDCd3NQoubxWPlaM
Message-ID: <CAJE_bqe97985RSZsKiUcuFogmoYbS6gT=cYEcE-75qbPNYd2hA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "<int-dir@ietf.org>" <int-dir@ietf.org>, int-ads@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations.all@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-dir/SppsPgdlrUdw2nnA8KioWNUJ6A0>
Subject: [Int-dir] INT-DIR review of draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations-03
X-BeenThere: int-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This list is for discussion between the members of the Internet Area directorate." <int-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/int-dir/>
List-Post: <mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-dir>, <mailto:int-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:34:29 -0000

I am an assigned INT directorate reviewer for
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations-03>.
These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Internet
Area Directors. Document editors and shepherd(s) should treat these
comments just like they would treat comments from any other IETF
contributors and resolve them along with any other Last Call comments
that have been received. For more details on the INT Directorate,
see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate.html.

This document is very well written and looks useful.  I didn't find
any obvious technical issues that may block publication.

One possible point that my warrant a discussion is that this document
doesn't seem to be very specific to resource constrained nodes (as the
title and abstract suggests).  I don't see anything tightly specific
to such nodes except for some parts of Section 3.  Even in Section 3
most of the discussions seem generic.  I wonder whether such general
privacy issues regarding IPv6 addresses are already covered by some
existing documents.  If so, this document could be much shorter by
just referring to such documents and focusing on a few points specific
to 6lo nodes.  If not, we might rather consider publishing it as such
a generic document.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya