[ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option-09: (with COMMENT)
Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 12 April 2017 14:54 UTC
Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D175131707; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 07:54:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option@ietf.org, Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>, Bill Cerveny <ietf@wjcerveny.com>, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, acmorton@att.com, ippm@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.49.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149200885746.15718.798617550888585150.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 07:54:17 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/2bSqaCCS06BJNpltznu85UXIcq4>
Subject: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option-09: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:54:17 -0000
Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option-09: 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-ippm-6man-pdm-option/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The analysis in Sec 4.2 seems to be missing some considerations. In cases where the packet payload is encrypted and the attacker does not have access to the keys, the attacker does not in fact have access to the entire packet, in which case PDM provides more information than a packet without PDM. Also in those cases, it seems like including PDM information would generally make a packet stream more susceptible to traffic analysis insofar as the timing and sequence information may provide additional indicators about the type of application in use, not just the speed of the end host.
- [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-… Nalini J Elkins
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [ippm] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-… Nalini J Elkins