Re: [MEDIACTRL] WGLC: draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-00.txt - just say "yes"

Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org> Mon, 29 October 2007 21:04 UTC

Return-path: <mediactrl-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImbmG-0006w5-Ca; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:04:04 -0400
Received: from mediactrl by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1ImbmE-0006w0-T3 for mediactrl-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:04:02 -0400
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImbmE-0006vs-Hq for mediactrl@ietf.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:04:02 -0400
Received: from usaga01-in.huawei.com ([206.16.17.211]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ImbmE-0007jp-5h for mediactrl@ietf.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:04:02 -0400
Received: from huawei.com (usaga01-in [172.18.4.6]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JQO007S2Y0JP2@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for mediactrl@ietf.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from s73602 (cpe-72-190-0-23.tx.res.rr.com [72.190.0.23]) by usaga01-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JQO00CQUY0GON@usaga01-in.huawei.com> for mediactrl@ietf.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:52:25 -0500
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>
Subject: Re: [MEDIACTRL] WGLC: draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-00.txt - just say "yes"
To: mediactrl@ietf.org
Message-id: <027a01c81a6d$9cd4d350$6401a8c0@china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
Content-type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <C34B74FD.EE5F%eburger@bea.com>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: e1e48a527f609d1be2bc8d8a70eb76cb
X-BeenThere: mediactrl@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media Control BOF Discussion List <mediactrl.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl>, <mailto:mediactrl-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/mediactrl>
List-Post: <mailto:mediactrl@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mediactrl-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl>, <mailto:mediactrl-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mediactrl-bounces@ietf.org

Just as background for the working group -

I've been doing shepherd write-ups AFTER WGLC, because it's my intention to 
give the working group as much room to work as possible, but I'm doing the 
shepherd write-up for this draft now, and the shepherd questionnaire 
includes this text:

   (1.g)  Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the
          document satisfies all ID nits?  (See
          http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html and
          http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/).  Boilerplate checks are
          not enough; this check needs to be thorough.  Has the document
          met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB
          Doctor, media type and URI type reviews?

and http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html includes this text:

Security Considerations section

MUST have meaningful exploration of security issues raised by the proposal, 
SHOULD include both risks and description of solutions or workarounds. See 
"Guidelines for Writing RFC Text on Security Considerations" [RFC3552] 
(Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC Text on Security 
Considerations," July 2003.) and "Guidelines for Mandating the Use of IPsec" 
[I-D.bellovin-useipsec] (Bellovin, S., "Guidelines for Mandating the Use of 
IPsec," August 2006.)

Eric and I believe that the appropriate security considerations for an 
architecture draft focus on aspects like whether confidentiality is 
required, rather than naming specific technologies ("MUST implement TLS").

We will, of course be bringing this back to the working group (along with 
anything else we spot while doing the shepherd write-up), so if you have 
thoughts about architecture-level security issues, please raise them on-list 
now - probably using a thread like "Architecture Draft Security Issues".

Thanks!

Spencer 




_______________________________________________
MEDIACTRL mailing list
MEDIACTRL@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mediactrl
Supplemental Web Site:
http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/mediactrl