Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-12

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Sun, 03 November 2019 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <acm@research.att.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 67DBA1200C1; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 11:49:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l0mg5KvpioaT; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 11:49:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5664F12008C; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 11:49:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049295.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xA3JjbWT026836; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 14:49:32 -0500
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0049295.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2w24xt8chr-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 03 Nov 2019 14:49:32 -0500
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xA3JnVZc091283; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:49:31 -0600
Received: from zlp30496.vci.att.com (zlp30496.vci.att.com [135.46.181.157]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xA3JnQf9091195 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:49:26 -0600
Received: from zlp30496.vci.att.com (zlp30496.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30496.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 3FDD5404B842; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.1.46]) by zlp30496.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 17C75404B841; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xA3JnPtY029427; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:49:25 -0600
Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (mail-azure.research.att.com [135.207.255.18]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id xA3JnJ2Y029057; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:49:20 -0600
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njbdcas1.research.att.com [135.197.255.61]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E7DDE361F; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 14:48:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njbdcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::8c6b:4b77:618f:9a01%11]) with mapi id 14.03.0468.000; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 14:49:05 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
CC: "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry.all@ietf.org>, "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-12
Thread-Index: AQHVkLYKwCcaKwXWlEmbpQnFQLyWtKd52uhA
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 19:49:05 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CFA0B6B26D@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <157261395653.31839.392742976360807570@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <157261395653.31839.392742976360807570@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [69.141.203.172]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-11-03_14:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1911030207
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/A1qe4EzW7-B70V6Ylz1hw9ctbJU>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-12
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 19:49:41 -0000

Hi Paul,

Thanks for your review and comments, please see below.

Al

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Wouters via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@ietf.org]
> Sent: Friday, November 1, 2019 9:13 AM
> To: secdir@ietf.org
> Cc: last-call@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry.all@ietf.org;
> ippm@ietf.org
> Subject: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-initial-registry-12
> 
> Reviewer: Paul Wouters
> Review result: Has Issues
> 
> 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.
> 
> As this document populates an IANA registry with metrics values, no security
> considerations apply. This is stated in the Security Section.
> 
> Normally, the IANA considerations are within one section and all other sections
> are written as if this has already been done, except with a [TBD] for any value
> IANA needs to put in. But this document uses text outside the Iana
> Considerations section like:
> 
>       "IANA is asked to assign different numeric identifiers to each of the two
>       Named Metrics."
> 
> It is better to rewrite this with clear text stating Name X is assigned value [TBD]
[acm] 
Thanks, I'll be working with IANA reps to resolve issues, too.
This hasn't come in previous IANA reviews, but we'll end
with wording that is clear and your suggestion is a good one.

> 
> Similarly, the document has "Change Controller", but the way this is normally
> phrased is to be part of the new Registry definition of "Registration
> Procedure(s)" which has defined values like "Expert review",
> "Specification Required", "First Come First Serve", etc. The document should be changed
> to reflect these standard types of policies, and ask IANA to create the
> Registries with the standardized procedure terms for updating those registries.
> 
[acm] 
I understand that the preferred entries under Change Controller 
are under discussion, and we are holding for guidance there.
In the Registry procedures, we currently call-out Expert Review
for the Registration Procedure, and it seems we may change to 
Specification Required.  Again, discussion with IANA will determine
the answer - the authors want this be as IANA-friendly as possible.