Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-eai-imap-utf8-07

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Fri, 28 August 2009 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C45F028C1C5 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.219
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.219 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.239, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vCatGA-rrq8R for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE29428C148 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:59:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [92.40.87.106] (92.40.87.106.sub.mbb.three.co.uk [92.40.87.106]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <SphFJQB9YbVT@rufus.isode.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:59:19 +0100
Message-ID: <4A984512.7010103@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 21:58:58 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>
References: <p0624083ec6bdad5d3ccd@[10.20.30.158]> <4A98271A.2020601@isode.com> <p06240806c6bdf3e9c412@[10.20.30.158]>
In-Reply-To: <p06240806c6bdf3e9c412@[10.20.30.158]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>, Xiaodong Lee <lee@cnnic.cn>, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-eai-imap-utf8-07
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:59:14 -0000

Paul Hoffman wrote:

>At 7:51 PM +0100 8/28/09, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>  
>
>>While I agree that these should have been fixed, I personally don't think it is a big deal.
>>    
>>
>Nor do I, that's why I didn't send this to the IESG or the IETF general list. However, Tim and Pasi have asked SecDir reviewers to comment on all aspects of a draft we are reviewing, not just the security aspects. I did not, for example, comment on the grammar issues that I strongly suspect will be fixed by the RFC Editor. However, if I were an IESG member reading the document for the first time, I would immediately ask why the abstract says "do not deploy implementations of this draft" for something that is meant to be an Experimental RFC.
>  
>
Fair enough.