Re: [mile] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> Fri, 24 June 2016 16:59 UTC

Return-Path: <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mile@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7107B12DC4A; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=kyY5JzNu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=bpBbb2vf
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 lrc9iTN5vxci; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 610C812D0A7; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 09:59:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E20F20DCD; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:59:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:59:38 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=ygDPFMNxFvGW3qLdFbIwYXUnanY=; b=kyY5Jz NutXvtfJMH2b4fGgBbFTusoCo9A5z5/te1G3x7THlTr3jsy9clyn0RL+bGzSUP92 FvLy0Yg27UL41atqQ+r3uSpvuvY4goPsxirj1cliw/9zyRuswUxFMlbX6zijHcvh EfNMdNiRUScmisGWa/UgpTunUSjBkUyz90ZNY=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=ygDPFMNxFvGW3qL dFbIwYXUnanY=; b=bpBbb2vf5PjJMuSyOKsOoLbn3qT5gVFHfuwBkenK3eCQh3M RghWzWRq7i2u0x+K4V4hAONJpRSpIsatfPTKVcRltyt/yeW1jBXNrOFYv6++JkeU dv/NPQ4qLdr9KcEdKaa16Ep4FIY/fuB2w3pDyxRkBUBKNnjN55dSIEEuhGPs=
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 709A2A887B; Fri, 24 Jun 2016 12:59:38 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1466787578.3424901.647604393.320171FC@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: vN9tjVblMx9XNUBZx1CH7NvT1PFs24XOOLv2nyf6qtdV 1466787578
From: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, "Roman D. Danyliw" <rdd@cert.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-1f1d081e
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 17:59:38 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAHbuEH54VwDJsoTFBik6Tr20WCHNgXea1DMzcHGQiBK_dMV8bA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160601073339.16171.59393.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFCD974F85C@marathon> <1464858290.1234564.625673017.7541014D@webmail.messagingengine.com> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFCD97500C7@marathon> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFCD976686D@marathon> <CAHbuEH54VwDJsoTFBik6Tr20WCHNgXea1DMzcHGQiBK_dMV8bA@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/0IIGEP4U5QnaR8OEDpV81TEHctY>
Cc: mile-chairs@tools.ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, mile-chairs@ietf.org, mile@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mile] Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-22: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange, IODEF extensions and RID exchanges" <mile.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mile/>
List-Post: <mailto:mile@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile>, <mailto:mile-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 16:59:41 -0000

Hi Kathleen/Roman,

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016, at 08:53 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> Hi Alexey,
> 
> Do the recent updates address your concerns?

The latest version is an improvement.

One final point I am uncomfortable with:

4.3.  Validation

   IODEF documents MUST be well-formed XML.  It is RECOMMENDED that
   recipients validate the document against the schema described in
   Section 8.  However, mere conformance to this schema is not
   sufficient for a semantically valid IODEF document.  The text of
   Section 3 describes further formatting and constraints; some that
   cannot be conveniently encoded in the schema.  These MUST also be
   considered by an IODEF implementation.  Furthermore, the enumerated
   values present in this document are a static list that will be
   incomplete over time as select attributes can be extended by a
   corresponding IANA registry per Section 10.2.  Therefore, IODEF
   implementations MUST periodically update their schema and MAY need to
   update their parsing algorithms to incorporate newly registered
   values.

How realistic is this to require all implementations to update their
schema? Is IODEFv2 intended to be used by IoT devices that might not
have much battery/CPU power to do this?
(I appreciate that this is different from my original DISCUSS point, but
this is related to a change that was caused by my DISCUSS. So I would
like to discuss this quickly.)

Best Regards,
Alexey

> Thanks,
> Kathleen
> 
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Roman D. Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> wrote:
> > Hi Alexey!
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Roman D. Danyliw [mailto:rdd@cert.org]
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 8:22 AM
> >> To: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> > [snip]
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:aamelnikov@fastmail.fm]
> >> > Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 5:05 AM
> >> > To: Roman D. Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>; The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
> >> > Cc: mile@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis@ietf.org;
> >> > takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp; mile-chairs@ietf.org; mile-
> >> > chairs@tools.ietf.org
> >> > Subject: Re: Alexey Melnikov's Discuss on draft-ietf-mile-rfc5070-bis-22:
> >> > (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> > > > COMMENT:
> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > --
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In 3.29.3.1: there is still a reference to RFC 822 (should be RFC
> >> > > > 5322)
> >> > >
> >> > > Actually, per Stephen's COMMENT on EAI
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mile/N52_1W9aXRw6gZSEqu0Y_vFuF
> >> > h
> >> > > 0),
> >> > > this likely needs to be RFC5336.
> >> >
> >> > Yes. Maybe keep both references?
> >>
> >> Makes sense.  I'll add in both 5322 and 5336.
> >
> > The updated text in -23 reads as follows:
> >
> > 2.12.  Email String
> >
> >    An email address is represented in the information model by the EMAIL
> >    data type.  The format of the EMAIL data type is documented in
> >    Section 3.4.1 of [RFC5322] and Section 3.3 of [RFC6531].
> >
> > 3.18.1.  Address Class
> > [snip]
> >       3.   e-mail.  Email address, per the EMAIL data type.
> >
> > 3.29.3.1.  BulkObservable Class
> > [snip]
> >       3.   e-mail.  Email address (per the Address@category attribute).
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Best regards,
> Kathleen
>