[secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-04

Chris Lonvick <lonvick.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 12 March 2017 02:44 UTC

Return-Path: <lonvick.ietf@gmail.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 D370312985D; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 j4ARNhtC9Lwn; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x242.google.com (mail-pg0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1CD412986F; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x242.google.com with SMTP id 25so14461734pgy.3; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version; bh=in+X3HMZwccAQXFXLxVC1M2lWRWbVyQVz/EUkC3rIXw=; b=qwdBpFnGRDpSiwJMLK4zddqUsIWh/9Hv6dU+MjrATJiV5cDjxmG40Mt0YcxEyp2b76 p29dlX+a/FFcOPPzGjgXVzcmZ3G0jZ/UpZ0D19IHw4H4lKV6GnkzqErUmzBKbFccvkc8 wwi85aI9ldS7sE7ixVXv9/XSNPqtZY3D18LQTdj1XD1qqo5B+0XvBBHsSRP5hVYEY6eY bGBKqF2Q+fNPxwj6rz+eWjDiPjWkIfCEeJcEXKFQ8LZfheQT08rxCcql6xdM5rhWE6WG 6t/vfHeIkbS4OUxpFfu9wzU02ciAfWxeEnr+PbE0z56i9l08PLNVhN8FKRLUJJ8pX1Rc /oiQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version; bh=in+X3HMZwccAQXFXLxVC1M2lWRWbVyQVz/EUkC3rIXw=; b=ovuKaxAzCEWXNhZyxpkiWWOiG/WtB9p+ABepYYQ7xKk7MgxrN7VFhwLVh/z1sm5GIR kQ7ZKgTW0S+uMhvu73rr0KoV0MkNRQEneitUwtmRpyimrWZcD9oW30IL5NXb85YNoqxG YZYUqWFpLDZXvi9Ca6ukkeEBsZCRpkA0XWNwWKSsiYRqTIw7KSqWSra/DAer5zzull6E cAoGFgAT8YEm8vfuijsbynfd2bL9aawlOAFBNiRGU4N1d6UD9/R0otefizvjN2Q7f3BN O6LP8zT5CBvXsS8Mx2BlzAmAXS+wu2SIu7oGplktvgA1xXO5koGhYSCNuVxS6ixkVmMG zuMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nIMRcLlHALlbw5yvKuHNpkVjwXd7TGzgSWMEdBOAeHvJi/fuwfU+bolDx9ehalFA==
X-Received: by 10.84.231.207 with SMTP id g15mr37415586pln.2.1489286698292; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Chriss-Air.attlocal.net ([2602:306:838b:1c40:edb9:2b32:fa09:a062]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id g29sm26281341pfg.37.2017.03.11.18.44.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 11 Mar 2017 18:44:58 -0800 (PST)
To: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format.all@ietf.org
From: Chris Lonvick <lonvick.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <58C4B625.4000102@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:44:53 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070904080001060800040607"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/HPIp6VxVpYcZZftJpeYjqFsmM_o>
Subject: [secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-04
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 12 Mar 2017 02:45:00 -0000

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.

The document is ready with minor nits. The document calls for the change 
of designation of a field in an established protocol. This is called out 
throughout Section 2 and will need to be ratified by the IANA in Section 
3. The previous documents set the bit to MUST BE ZERO and this document 
uses it to signal an option to use either the NTP timestamp (still using 
0) or a more recently adopted 1588 timestamp (1). The Security 
Considerations section appropriately names the prior documents and 
references their Security Considerations sections.

Minor nits:

The last sentence of the first paragraph of Section 1 is:
"And of mentioned solutions will be subject to additional queuing delays 
that negatively affect data plane clock accuracy."
Perhaps should be "Any of the mentioned..."

The second sentence of the first paragraph of Section 2 is:
"In these procedures, the Modes field been used to identify and select 
specific communication capabilities."
Perhaps should be "...has been used..."

I didn't do a thorough read through the document so there may be other 
minor nits.

Regards,
Chris