Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04
Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr> Sun, 21 June 2015 10:17 UTC
Return-Path: <emmanuel.baccelli@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 420331A00E0 for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.423
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 Mk7KOy-OLNHL for <p2psip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 473A01ACE60 for <p2psip@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oigx81 with SMTP id x81so105416210oig.1 for <p2psip@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=dFQ//xG7As+x5v7kPRm5XeDfB00lt81TaEgAcO4WeRc=; b=y3GZuZBvY8te05HsQzx0IDAS0Isu6ar/Mqo9r9s4LAElqUBzfUcucyBxlMLiM59rHy 75MH3O9+W7KvSxxeYfhfldwxEFbM+VQ83fv3idm8UZ75ZUDYuxx+oqmNDW8BrQL/6jNH g1mWUsktLdYkw9ZZ/IdTn4C0moaY85tF4U1FVkX7OG/WxbRgKLHrEVkahjuGNmmG5OHk q6zorOkuaVLho+srTQLGUEvDP1gdG8ndGAs4PcpYqVTp/Hx1QyIIFtIjammKnkNN4IZB tPzVo6q1X/UkrizCAGZm/wHTHvY0li8uA8AfbYE0pFasvuWys9iTDcdw3399dd8/JrlM Gwww==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.173.7 with SMTP id bg7mr20663940oec.86.1434881858738; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: emmanuel.baccelli@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.10.170 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.10.170 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jun 2015 03:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <558156F8.30203@haw-hamburg.de>
References: <CANK0pbaZden4A=wOgJ7VevjqaLjMnG=TqOAN7rToGc=ekp+HoQ@mail.gmail.com> <B5B18BCE-DAB7-4C45-975A-5ECB3B6250B6@cooperw.in> <0dbe3c40f2784076b961e730dd1f17d4@HUB01.mailcluster.haw-hamburg.de> <558156F8.30203@haw-hamburg.de>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:17:38 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: gi9XrNJyK8yQS9OMu084fPR2OeY
Message-ID: <CANK0pbaGvifSwBne3GyYoC3r+=os7K6Rj93DyY_KZg68op0Wfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>
To: "Thomas C. Schmidt" <t.schmidt@haw-hamburg.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bd767887c2218051904773b"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/p2psip/fgPcdFiX9kY2Ws5j-pV1Regrsvo>
Cc: p2psip <p2psip@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04
X-BeenThere: p2psip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Peer-to-Peer SIP working group discussion list <p2psip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/p2psip/>
List-Post: <mailto:p2psip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2015 10:17:42 -0000
Hi Thomas, Thanks. I think the new/updated text fixes the comments I had. Best, Emmanuel Le 17 juin 2015 13:16, "Thomas C. Schmidt" <t.schmidt@haw-hamburg.de> a écrit : > Hi Emmanuel, all, > > On 23.04.2015 11:03, Emmanuel Baccelli wrote: > > I have reviewed draft-ietf-p2psip-share-05, and here are my comments. >> >> >> General comments: >> in my opinion the draft is in good shape and reads well. I have a few >> nits and editorial suggestions detailed below. I believe these can be >> addressed quite easily with a quick resubmission and my impression is >> the doc is ready to go. >> >> > thanks - please find our records below. > > >> Detailed comments: >> >> in Section 1: refer to RFC6940 (and which section, if applicable) the >> first time specific terms are used such as "RELOAD Usage" or "RELOAD >> security model". Spoiler: I will have a lot of such comments below ;) >> >> > Done: We prepended the statement fixing the relation to RFC6940: > > "[RFC6940] defines the base protocol for REsource LOcation And > Discovery (RELOAD) that allows for application-specific extensions by > Usages." > > in Section 2: for reader convenience, I suggest listing the key terms >> (without recalling their definitions) imported from RFC6940, and the >> p2psip-concepts draft in the paragraph right after the 2119 boilerplate. >> > > Done: We named the most prominent terms: > > " This document uses the terminology and definitions from the RELOAD > base [RFC6940] and the peer-to-peer SIP concepts draft > [I-D.ietf-p2psip-concepts], in particular the RELOAD Usage, Resource > and Kind." > > >> in Section 3.1: in step 3, I suggest being explicit that the 8bit part >> is a suffix (least significant bits) >> >> > Oh, thanks for that one. We clarified: > > " 3. Append an 8 bit long short individual index value to those 24 bit > of the Node-ID" > > in Section 4.1: >> - "...Alice is also granted (limited) write access..." >> Either explain what "limited" means here, or remove this adjective. >> >> > Good point, thanks: The right is actually explained in the following > sentence, so we removed "(limited)": > > " peer Alice is also granted write access to the ACL as indicated by > the allow_delegation flag (ad) set to 1. This configuration > authorizes Alice to store further trust delegations to the Shared > Resource, i.e., add items to the ACL." > > - "Note that overwriting existing items in an Access Control List that >> reference a different Kind-ID..." >> Clarify: different from what? I suppose you mean that the overwrite >> results in changing the Kind-ID >> > > Yes, we clarified: > > "Note that > overwriting existing items in an Access Control List with a change in > the Kind-ID revokes all trust delegations in the corresponding > subtree (see Section 6.2)." > > >> - "The Resource Owner is allowed to overwrite any existing ACL item, but >> should be aware of its consequences." >> Either quickly explain / give examples of consequences or remove this >> sentence. >> > > O.K., we clarified: > > "The Resource Owner is allowed > to overwrite any existing ACL item, but should be aware of its > consequences on the trust delegation chain." > > >> in Section 5.1: "The specifications in this document scheme adhere to >> this paradigm...". >> add reference to RFC6940 (and the exact section). It will help readers >> grasp quicker what draft-ietf-p2psip-share specification adds here. >> >> > Done: > > " Each RELOAD node uses a certificate to identify itself using its user > name (or Node-ID) while storing data under a specific Resource-ID > (see Section 7.3 in [RFC6940]). The specifications in this document > scheme adhere to this paradigm, but.." > > in Section 6.1: >> - first sentence "Write access ... solely be issued by the Resource >> Owner." >> rephrase needed (confusing as readers already know that delegation is >> possible). >> >> > O.k., we clarified: > > " Write access to a Kind that is intended to be shared with other > RELOAD users can solely be *initiated* by the Resource Owner." > > - "... stored in the numerical order... starting with the index of the >> root item...". >> I have a (stupid) question: What if the Node-ID of the an authorized >> peer with ad=1 has a node-ID that is numerically smaller that that of >> the owner? >> > > That does not matter. Each node has a unique prefix (up to unlikely > collisions) and writes in its own index space to avoid race conditions (see > Sect. 3.1). Here we only describe the node-specific indexing. > > I suggest rephrasing in order to clarify this corner case, just to make >> sure no one is confused? >> >> > We clarified: > > "For each succeeding ACL item, the Resource Owner > increments its individual index value by one (see Section 3.1) so > that items can be stored in the numerical order of the array index > starting with the index of the root item." > > > in Section 6.5: Step 1. reference "as per RFC 6940 Section X.Y." >> >> in Section 6.6: Because it is possible here, I would have preferred to >> see the last 2 paragraphs written in steps + pseudo-code style >> if...else..else. But that's a matter of taste. >> >> > I guess ... ;) > > > So, we've updated and submit in a second. > > Thanks again, > > Thomas > > > >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in >> <mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>> wrote: >> >> Yes, that’s fine, thanks. >> Alissa >> >> On Apr 21, 2015, at 1:40 AM, Emmanuel Baccelli >> <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr <mailto:Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > Hi Alissa, >> > >> > if it is not too late: I am currently reviewing the document. ETA >> early next week. >> > Sorry for the delay. Is that alright with you? >> > >> > Best, >> > >> > Emmanuel >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > P2PSIP mailing list >> >P2PSIP@ietf.org <mailto:P2PSIP@ietf.org> >> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip >> >> >> > -- > > Prof. Dr. Thomas C. Schmidt > ° Hamburg University of Applied Sciences Berliner Tor 7 ° > ° Dept. Informatik, Internet Technologies Group 20099 Hamburg, Germany ° > ° http://www.haw-hamburg.de/inet Fon: +49-40-42875-8452 > ° > ° http://www.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/~schmidt Fax: +49-40-42875-8409 > ° >
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Alissa Cooper
- [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Emmanuel Baccelli
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Alissa Cooper
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Emmanuel Baccelli
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Thomas C. Schmidt
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Alissa Cooper
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Thomas C. Schmidt
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Alissa Cooper
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Thomas C. Schmidt
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Thomas C. Schmidt
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Emmanuel Baccelli
- Re: [P2PSIP] WGLC for draft-ietf-p2psip-share-04 Bless, Roland (TM)