Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-09

Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 06 April 2017 16:51 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF25F6AA27@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <CAGL6epLwPY=B0q2t+Qin8DHRy8oVh4hFofD1QeYvb3vAM7PTQg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHbuEH5npwx76m19zMT-uZNK0cA1Rpkyjth5ZSoMUmv5YDwXRA@mail.gmail.com> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF25F6AA27@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
From: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 12:51:15 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHbuEH76f3sKPaRbbvgCFyqSUtp_zupfY7h2BukHK44TqGVbFw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com>
Cc: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef <rifaat.ietf@gmail.com>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt@ietf.org" <draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/DU79Uk5N4ec2aQrP6-EHI3NFX2w>
Subject: Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-09
Precedence: list

Hi Al,

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:27 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acmorton@att.com> wrote:
> Hi Kathleen and Rifaat,
>
> instead of
> ... forward packets to 'trusted' tools, ...
> we could say
> ... forward packets to SP-controlled tools,
>

I do like that better as it gets directly to the point of what the
contributor intended, I think.

> which seems correct for this section:
> 3.1.2.  SP Content Monitoring of Applications

I'll make the update as I think I have the running draft with the
appendix reference changes.

Thank you!
>
> Al
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kathleen Moriarty [mailto:kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2017 11:10 AM
>> To: Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
>> Cc: secdir@ietf.org; The IESG; draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-encrypt-09
>>
>> Hi Rifaat,
>>
>> Thanks for your review!  We had #1 queued up for the next revision.
>> Trusted had single quotes around it because it isn't the term of a
>> product or well known term, but trusted by the organization.  I don't
>> like the word trust because it is loaded and used differently by many.
>> If others think we should remove that or the RFC editor, that's fine.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kathleen
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
>> <rifaat.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 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.
>> >
>> > Summary: Ready with nits
>> >
>> > The document describes security and management functions that might be
>> > impacted by the increased use of encryption.
>> > The goal of the document is to only list the potential problems, not
>> to
>> > propose
>> > solutions to these problems.
>> >
>> >
>> > nits:
>> >
>> > 1. The document refers to an Appendix in multiples places, which is
>> now
>> > section 7.
>> > 2. Page 18, second line: the word 'trusted' has quotes around it; is
>> there a
>> > reason for that?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >  Rifaat
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Kathleen



-- 

Best regards,
Kathleen

[secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-encr… Rifaat Shekh-Yusef
Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-… MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-… Kathleen Moriarty
Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-mm-wg-effect-… Rifaat Shekh-Yusef