[secdir] Feedback about secdir reviews
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Mon, 26 March 2012 07:59 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 52BF421F85B4 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.475
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.876, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BBtgETLbyZ5M for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:59:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scss.tcd.ie (hermes.scss.tcd.ie [IPv6:2001:770:10:200:889f:cdff:fe8d:ccd2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5780621F85BB for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 00:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973F4171C17 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:58:53 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:subject:mime-version :user-agent:from:date:message-id:received:received: x-virus-scanned; s=cs; t=1332748733; bh=86sQCdqTDhM/qy5UioZwaWyl uDDlQfMonUC6R9ZUewM=; b=58560j2yf649YNCtzd9FiHTPjBeO6D4yOpnPFR6T 8dkr6BeMrlqCpAvA9HLZPNckO6QkqQw4kau9UkJ599NXhsp9/20k5PpSNTSzucjX CM4TMbMLd+VlUIZFwDKl15TYXbEDAqJU31YqKaId0z2jlpplkyJ/mvulIPkXWhg8 3AuEjm8Ia3q1BXKzz5kcgUoAOI+FHdMdbf4tUBhmC3Q59h/hOa0NNbzeIFkSOKre rvvaD0IftGIt/zxdtUkkwzAQEtysVckyHjDsyyZ5Kqxeaofmgi0TQqdbvVG7MVb0 mJMXj3R/PFr7IvtTzOcI6BgoMVhAAx9WY/ADRrq1zopk9Q==
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with ESMTP id J6bYc1i3lKto for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:58:53 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [130.129.37.121] (dhcp-2579.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.37.121]) by smtp.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C136171C02 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:58:53 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <4F7021BC.1010406@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:58:52 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [secdir] Feedback about secdir reviews
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: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 07:59:06 -0000
Hi all, The IESG got some anonymized feedback today from the nomcom process. Part of that was that authors were unsure as to how to react to secdir reviews. And in particular, as to whether or not to engage with the secdir reviewer. I know we have some boilerplate [1] that tries to handle this, but it might be worth taking another look at that to see if we can make it better. Something for the lunchtime session on Tuesday. Cheers, S. [1] http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview
- [secdir] Feedback about secdir reviews Stephen Farrell
- Re: [secdir] Feedback about secdir reviews David Harrington
- Re: [secdir] Feedback about secdir reviews Paul Hoffman