[secdir] correction: Re: secdir review of draft-hollenbeck-rfc4932bis-01

[Chris Lonvick <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009, Chris Lonvick wrote:

> 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.
>
> I found security-related problems in my review of the document.

That's supposed to be:
I found _no_ security-related problems in my review of the document.

Apologies for the confusion, and thanks Richard for pointing that out.

Regards,
Chris

>
> I did see, however, that the Security Considerations, which point back to ID 
> 4930.bis, are very similar to the security considerations in RFC 4930.  They 
> hint that a secure transport is needed to thwart common mitm attacks but the 
> section does not give any specific guidance.
>
> It has been two years since RFC 4930 was published.  Have any secure 
> transports been used?  If so, I think it would be a good idea to state which 
> one(s) and how its attributes do thwart the threats.
>
> Best regards,
> Chris
>