Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-05.txt

That should probably be mentioned in the introduction. Is that concept cleared with the RFC Editor? Generally, RFCs can't reference I-Ds, but clearly in this case that's what you want.

        --Charlie

-----Original Message-----
From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage@alcatel-lucent.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 6:39 PM
To: Charlie Kaufman; secdir@mit.edu; jdrosen@cisco.com; dean.willis@softarmor.com
Subject: RE: Secdir review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-05.txt

The agreement in the SIP group was that we would try and update this document every 12 - 18 months.

So we certainly do not want the document held by the RFC editor to complete these references. We will always fix that in a revision.

Regards

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charlie Kaufman [mailto:charliek@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 10:17 PM
> To: secdir@mit.edu; jdrosen@cisco.com;
> dean.willis@softarmor.com; DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Subject: Secdir review of draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide-05.txt
>
> I am reviewing 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. Feel free to forward
> to any appropriate forum.
>
> This document lists and categorizes all of the RFCs and
> Internet Drafts concerning SIP with a goal of helping someone
> who is trying to find the right document do so. It contains a
> short paragraph summarizing each document.
>
> As such this document raises no new security considerations
> (and says so, pointing readers at the security considerations
> sections of the underlying documents). In the context of this
> document, that seems entirely appropriate.
>
> Note to authors and WG chairs: There is a problem with this
> document in that it will quickly become out of date as RFCs
> are updated, I-Ds are promoted to RFC or abandoned, and new
> I-Ds are created. I could imagine the RFC editor blocking its
> promotion until all of the referenced I-Ds are either
> promoted or abandoned, by which time it would certainly be
> obsolete. It might be that this document will need to
> "permanently" be an I-D unless at some point in the future
> activity in the SIP space drops off dramatically. I don't
> know whether there is precedent for such a document. There
> probably should be such a document for each area or sub-area.
>
> Typo: p5 "identifes"-> "identifies"
>
>
>         --Charlie
>

_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
secdir@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/secdir
_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
secdir@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir