[secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-v6ops-wireline-incremental-ipv6

Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com> Thu, 30 August 2012 01:29 UTC

Return-Path: <clonvick@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BE111E810B; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:29:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sp8Cax-XdBAl; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B10C411E8103; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=clonvick@cisco.com; l=589; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1346290159; x=1347499759; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=h161lTjhmSTwhUaE2bPwl6gC8NxuA6tVtpqehReqPog=; b=bh7os4TevHvhPySmDqOXzDTJ5alstSq/T+7egvupx/bBl2Q/9Paemgn3 VMEp7m5pMq7VU2q44T9bt9bJdIvrKcXifCGzNBa3DODeO4B4wlBTOftks rgt2tN5PGPgTmNdBRIfDK198/8LLnD6VYDMKNqrQBuiktTaai7yrKO9dv U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvwEADnBPlCrRDoG/2dsb2JhbABFuneBB4I5ASUCgX40h2qcBqAvkWEDiE+bNYFngwM
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,336,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="54074807"
Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Aug 2012 01:29:19 +0000
Received: from sjc-xdm-114 (sjc-xdm-114.cisco.com [171.71.188.119]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q7U1TJ2K025611 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:29:19 GMT
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>
To: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-v6ops-wireline-incremental-ipv6.all@tools.ietf.org
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1208291803400.24235@sjc-xdm-114.cisco.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LRH 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: [secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-v6ops-wireline-incremental-ipv6
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 01:29:20 -0000

Hi,

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just like any other last call comments.

Overall I found the document to be well written and very informative.  The 
Security Considerations is complimentary and appropriate for the document. 
I found no nits to complain about so I recommend publication.

Thanks and regards,
Chris