Re: [mile] Working Group Last Call for IODEF Guidance

For completeness, all of Adam’s comments are now fixed in the latest version which will be posted soon.
Thank you for the review Adam.
Panos

From: Adam Montville [mailto:adam.w.montville@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 2:27 PM
To: Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) <pkampana@cisco.com<mailto:pkampana@cisco.com>>; Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) <ncamwing@cisco.com<mailto:ncamwing@cisco.com>>; mile@ietf.org<mailto:mile@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mile] Working Group Last Call for IODEF Guidance

Thanks for forwarding this on. I had not intended to comment off-list.

Kind regards,

Adam
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM Panos Kampanakis (pkampana) <pkampana@cisco.com<mailto:pkampana@cisco.com>> wrote:
For completeness, below is Adam’s review shared offline. We are planning to fix all his comments in the final iteration.

~~~~~~
Hi All,

Here's my review. The draft is generally well written and sufficiently organized. While I have not implemented IODEF, upon reading the draft I felt as though there was enough information there to give appropriate, but not overly-prescriptive guidance to an implementer.

I also found some language improvements/nits. Some are stylistic and may have already been raised, so please take them only as suggestions. Generally speaking, the draft seems ready to me.

Abstract: Second to last sentence seems incomplete. Should the end of that sentence read: "...and use-cases of how IODEF is being used." (Adding "used").

Page 3: First full paragraph, second sentence. Proposed text: "...IODEF implementers to decide dwhich are important."

Page 3: First full paragraph, fourth sentence: Proposed text: "...in rare circumstances."

Page 4: Second paragraph of Section 3.2, first sentence. Strike "has", so that it reads "...if we have DDos as...".

Page 5: First full paragraph. Proposed text: "...IndicatorData class and its included classes..." Or whatever makes sense.

Page 5: First paragraph of section 3.3, last sentence... Strike the 's' at the end of "fulfills"

Page 5: Third paragraph of section 3.3, first sentence. Proposed text: "...Method, and RecoveryTime..."

Page 6: First paragraph, section 4.1, second to last sentence. Proposed text: "...representations into an IANA registry."

Page 6: First paragraph, section 4.2, third sentence. Proposed text: "Additional classes..."

Page 6: Third paragraph, section 4.2. Proposed text: "...or importing them in an IODEF document..."

Page 6: Last sentence on that page of section 4.3. Proposed text: "...in order to form a group of indicators that..."

Page 7: Last sentence of first (partial) paragraph. Proposed text: "...grouping more than one indicator or observable."

Page 9: Paragraph after step 5. I think DDoS had already been defined, so you could remove "Distributed Denial of Service"

That's it.
Kind regards,
Adam
~~~~~~

From: mile [mailto:mile-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:mile-bounces@ietf.org>] On Behalf Of Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing)
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 7:29 PM
To: mile@ietf.org<mailto:mile@ietf.org>
Subject: [mile] Working Group Last Call for IODEF Guidance

Colleagues,

We are doing another WGLC for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mile-iodef-guidance

Please provide comments before May 1st and provide your support and/ or raise any issue you feel are yet to be addressed.

Regards, Nancy

_______________________________________________
mile mailing list
mile@ietf.org<mailto:mile@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile