IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mile] Late WG LC comment on SCI draft

"Takeshi Takahashi" <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp> Mon, 29 July 2013 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp>
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 76F7711E812A for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.355
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.355 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7JJfTN8hCike for <mile@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns1.nict.go.jp (ns1.nict.go.jp [IPv6:2001:df0:232:300::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE7911E80F2 for <mile@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (gw1 [133.243.18.250]) by ns1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id r6THumwu002036; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 02:56:48 +0900 (JST)
Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id r6THumY3008108; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 02:56:48 +0900 (JST)
Received: from VAIO (ssh.nict.go.jp [133.243.3.49]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id r6THujWe008105; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 02:56:46 +0900 (JST)
From: Takeshi Takahashi <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp>
To: "'Black, David'" <david.black@emc.com>, mile@ietf.org
References: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE712984AD5F1@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE712984AD5F1@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 02:56:47 +0900
Message-ID: <007d01ce8c85$000a5820$001f0860$@nict.go.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHXSPsQfzyD03m9Mh9fACaNIf3GmJlqbsvg
Content-Language: ja
Subject: Re: [mile] Late WG LC comment on SCI draft
X-BeenThere: mile@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Takeshi Takahashi <takeshi_takahashi@nict.go.jp>
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:59:01 -0000

Hi David,

Thank you for your kind comment.
I also think the work of the reference format draft is important, and it
could be incorporated in the RFC5070-bis.

Regarding the connection to the SCI draft, I guess you are meaning that the
"SpecID" and "AttackPatternID(or similar IDs such as VulnerabilityID)"
attributes should be combined into one attribute and be represented
following the reference format draft.
I am a bit reluctant to do so.
In case of the SCI draft, it also has "ext-SpecID" field.
Though we could combine "ext-SpecID" and "AttackPatternID" as well, I am not
sure the need for that. It could just increase the complexity in case of the
SCI draft.
(We will end up with mixing "SpecID:AttackPatternID" and
"ext-SpecID:AttackPatternID" in a same field, and SpecID values are chosen
from the list in the IANA table while ext-SpecID values are not.)
Moreover, since we anyway use XML, I am not sure why we need to combine two
fields into one by using colon (in case of the SCI draft): we could simply
have two separated attributes within the SCI draft.

On the other hand, the SCI draft and the Reference Format draft can cope
with each other nicely once the RFC5070-bis incorporates the Reference
Format draft, since the SCI draft uses Reference classes (that should be the
new Reference class incorporating the Reference Format draft by the time the
RFC5070-bis is published).

Anyway, thank you for your kind clarification question.

Kind regards,
Take


> -----Original Message-----
> From: mile-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mile-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Black, David
> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 3:23 PM
> To: mile@ietf.org
> Subject: [mile] Late WG LC comment on SCI draft
> 
> Should the SCI draft be requiring that references to SCI documents use the
> format in the IODEF Enumeration Reference Format draft
> (draft-ietf-mile-enum-reference-format-00)?
> 
> This seems like a good place to start using that reference format.
> 
> Thanks,
> --David
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> david.black@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mile mailing list
> mile@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email