Re: [multipathtcp] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

On 14/09/16 16:25, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> actually the answer might be 'no'. But I guess the reason why they don't
> talk about it, is because we don't have any reports here.

Hmm, it seems that scholar at least has some references
to stuff [1]. I've no clue if those're useful or not
though - did anyone go looking? Be a shame to not include
some if they were useful/relevant.

Ta,
S.

[1]
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_ylo=2015&q=MPTCP+security&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5

> 
> Mirja
> 
> 
> On 14.09.2016 12:47, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
>> draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: No Objection
>>
>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
>> introductory paragraph, however.)
>>
>>
>> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
>> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>>
>>
>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mptcp-experience/
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> COMMENT:
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I was a bit sad that there was no reporting of
>> experiences with the security aspects of MPTCP.  Have
>> we really learned nothing worth saying about that?
>> Have we really seen no attacks on, or tailored to,
>> MPTCP? It seems odd that the answer to both questions
>> is "no."
>>
>>