Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-building): Missing discussion of link encryption and group keys
"roll issue tracker" <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org> Mon, 28 April 2014 19:55 UTC
Return-Path: <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3189F1A6FFC for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:55:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
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 kD4pUP-Vtw7a for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4333D1A6FBA for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40805 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>) id 1WereC-0002Sc-Ut; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 21:55:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: roll issue tracker <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software
To: draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building@tools.ietf.org, mariainesrobles@gmail.com
X-Trac-Project: roll
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:55:28 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/144#comment:3
Message-ID: <086.d048499cdfe0adbe22556352a6e567ae@trac.tools.ietf.org>
References: <071.aa142153295054714a8b618b84a00f2b@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 144
In-Reply-To: <071.aa142153295054714a8b618b84a00f2b@trac.tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: draft-ietf-roll-applicability-home-building@tools.ietf.org, mariainesrobles@gmail.com, roll@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Resent-To: abr@sdesigns.dk, consultancy@vanderstok.org, emmanuel.baccelli@inria.fr, robert.cragie@gridmerge.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/xCD9tVZjQxh9SSrXw-NMsY0MfTU
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-building): Missing discussion of link encryption and group keys
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Reply-To: roll@ietf.org
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:55:43 -0000
#144: Missing discussion of link encryption and group keys Comment (by mariainesrobles@gmail.com): Robert Cragie comment - date: 04/23/2014 <RCC> I agree and would propose the following change to the last two paragraphs of section 2 (note a couple of grammar/typo changes too): "In building control, the infrastructure of the building management network can be shared with the security/access, the IP telephony, and the fire/alarm networks. This approach has a positive impact on the operation and cost of the network; however, care should be taken to ensure that the availability of the building management network does not become compromised beyond the ability for critical functions to perform adequately. In homes, the network for audio/video streaming and gaming has different requirements, where the most important one is the high need in bandwidth for entertainment not needed for control. It is expected that the entertainment network in the home will mostly be separate from the control network, which also lessens the impact on availability of the control network." </RCC> “Nits: ….Section 6.1 “ <RCC>Agreed</RCC> Catherine Meadows comment - 04/24/2014 <CM> I am fine with all of Robert’s comments.</CM> -- -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-roll- yvonneanne.pignolet@gmail.com | applicability-home- Type: defect | building@tools.ietf.org Priority: major | Status: new Component: applicability-home- | Milestone: building | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Resolution: Keywords: Security Review | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/trac/ticket/144#comment:3> roll <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/>
- [Roll] [roll] #144: Missing discussion of link en… roll issue tracker
- Re: [Roll] [roll] #144: Missing discussion of lin… roll issue tracker
- Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-buildi… roll issue tracker
- Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-buildi… roll issue tracker
- Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-buildi… roll issue tracker
- Re: [Roll] [roll] #144 (applicability-home-buildi… roll issue tracker