IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [kitten] Shepherd review: draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness-07

Michiko Short <michikos@microsoft.com> Wed, 19 October 2016 00:08 UTC

Return-Path: <michikos@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: kitten@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B651294A1 for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 17:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microsoft.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 RddQ4lPbGLlY for <kitten@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 17:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM01-BY2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2nam01on0136.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.34.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E051129446 for <kitten@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2016 17:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=ntv2OwAwYk7pd13C62sZ9cKmPWa6kecYnmK5U/d2SYA=; b=ITiYNebP9zdIKIIbMv2lwDqoT/s6z5o3qhXF6Mjsnfcy+3wE1lQwePy4r7t+z7ZYFl1IJLnGfXLk9gE3OcfAfhLCRNuTWoNDTkKLSXa6Kqv+UV/ZrVY30SiuAYGhyQN1HYSPMnL093a71D7nBR1rZuF512kmqfZwZNU0RCIMnZc=
Received: from CY1PR03MB2315.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.207.138) by CY1PR03MB2316.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.166.207.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.12; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:08:14 +0000
Received: from CY1PR03MB2315.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.207.138]) by CY1PR03MB2315.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.166.207.138]) with mapi id 15.01.0669.018; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:08:13 +0000
From: Michiko Short <michikos@microsoft.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU>, Matt Rogers <mrogers@redhat.com>
Thread-Topic: [kitten] Shepherd review: draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness-07
Thread-Index: AQHSKXHa1YzUVItdfkKIWhfYHm+6saCu5qGg
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:08:13 +0000
Message-ID: <CY1PR03MB23154923C2C95FA3D01A6C51D0D20@CY1PR03MB2315.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1476719323.13238.1.camel@redhat.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1610180007300.5272@multics.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1610180007300.5272@multics.mit.edu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=michikos@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:4898:80e8:7::4f0]
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b4e88009-8206-48e8-695b-08d3f7b404b1
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; CY1PR03MB2316; 7:5X8AU8pTKGrN5RrX1V+0irXQY0BjC3Z07g5yC/8TmBJwx8yAheerWWffc1PUw6Smk9xcObgRhmi6GQY/PXZl0TmBcPfX5UvkzrdlDIEOsqKIEJjbNt5TtwIu+zMT+q/7Ls80JUrV9VgE/OgVXBVl4srODcHlGhF3RaAPDqEsKtk8YbQIqALEj49anBGoFv4zbhycsdIZkxmYDGdtpUbDLvoU4URSKVlqkk52uSRAfFfzJngcHDJVEDXrjy5X+mR7zDaFyeFgPGED64K2y9vQBjz2e+tn4KBrvsbAvNWre8YuVSejTjFmNprJ79KbeazINBfBAygxSavMGoWwzJkrDAdBCLMWLNkxSddwEMXawtTz9ntjCJ022facjZcY1hvW
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:CY1PR03MB2316;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CY1PR03MB23160D457B410EBCFACC23ECD0D20@CY1PR03MB2316.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(788757137089);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425038)(6040176)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(61426038)(61427038); SRVR:CY1PR03MB2316; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:CY1PR03MB2316;
x-forefront-prvs: 0100732B76
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(7916002)(24454002)(13464003)(377454003)(199003)(189002)(81156014)(2950100002)(77096005)(5005710100001)(1720100001)(15975445007)(2906002)(76576001)(2900100001)(81166006)(5002640100001)(7736002)(7846002)(4326007)(74316002)(3660700001)(68736007)(92566002)(305945005)(586003)(33656002)(99286002)(6116002)(3280700002)(122556002)(106356001)(106116001)(54356999)(50986999)(86612001)(10090500001)(76176999)(101416001)(10400500002)(87936001)(8936002)(2171001)(10290500002)(105586002)(102836003)(189998001)(5001770100001)(5660300001)(19580405001)(97736004)(9686002)(8676002)(8990500004)(19580395003)(86362001)(7696004)(230783001)(3826002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:CY1PR03MB2316; H:CY1PR03MB2315.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Oct 2016 00:08:13.2119 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY1PR03MB2316
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/kitten/58hYxWP2UBPtmzwLf525r7zM-Hs>
Cc: "kitten@ietf.org" <kitten@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [kitten] Shepherd review: draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness-07
X-BeenThere: kitten@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Common Authentication Technologies - Next Generation <kitten.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/kitten/>
List-Post: <mailto:kitten@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten>, <mailto:kitten-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 00:08:19 -0000

Ben or Matt, do you need me to update or are we good with the latest version?

Thanks,
Mich

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Kaduk [mailto:kaduk@MIT.EDU] 
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 9:10 PM
To: Matt Rogers <mrogers@redhat.com>
Cc: kitten@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [kitten] Shepherd review: draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness-07

On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, Matt Rogers wrote:

> Hi,
>
> During my review of draft-ietf-kitten-pkinit-freshness-07, the idnits 
> checker brought up the following issues:
>
>  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
>   -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
>   ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC4556]), which it
>      shouldn't.  Please replace those with straight textual mentions 
> of the
>      documents in question.
>
>
>   Miscellaneous warnings:
>   -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
>   -- The document date (May 23, 2016) is 147 days in the past.  Is 
> this
>      intentional?


These two seem to be valid warnings, though the "147 days in the past" is mostly just the chairs' fault.

>   Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
>   -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
>      (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative 
> references
>      to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
>
>   -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '0' on line 224
>      'cusec        [0] INTEGER (0..999999),...'

The idnits checker doesn't like our ASN.1 explicit tag values; there's nothing we can do other than ignore the nits alerts.

>   == Missing Reference: 'This RFC' is mentioned on line 261, but not
>      defined
> '| 150  | PA_AS_FRESHNESS | [This RFC] |...'

This one can probably be ignored as well.  There might be some magic text that will have the idnits checker ignore the self-reference, but I don't know what it is.

>   ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 5349
>
>
>      Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 6 comments 
> (--).
>
> An updated document with these corrections, or some comments on these 
> for justification of leaving them be would be helpful.

An updated document would be nice, but the needed changes are small enough that in my opinion they could be left as RFC Editor notes.

-Ben

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email