[secdir] secdir review of draft-ymbk-splusp
"Scott G. Kelly" <scott@hyperthought.com> Mon, 24 January 2011 18:21 UTC
Return-Path: <scott@hyperthought.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 6D08D3A6B21 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:21:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.039
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.929, BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Hlp71m5TvyJv for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:21:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp162.iad.emailsrvr.com (smtp162.iad.emailsrvr.com [207.97.245.162]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 748F93A6A6C for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:21:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp46.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 9642FE87B7; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 13:24:51 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: OK
Received: from dynamic13.wm-web.iad.mlsrvr.com (dynamic13.wm-web.iad1a.rsapps.net [192.168.2.220]) by smtp46.relay.iad1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 795F0E86F7; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 13:24:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hyperthought.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dynamic13.wm-web.iad.mlsrvr.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A36F3218001; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 13:24:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: by apps.rackspace.com (Authenticated sender: scott@hyperthought.com, from: scott@hyperthought.com) with HTTP; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:24:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 10:24:51 -0800
From: "Scott G. Kelly" <scott@hyperthought.com>
To: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ymbk-splusp.all@tools.ietf.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Importance: Normal
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Type: plain
Message-ID: <1295893491.433714482@192.168.4.58>
X-Mailer: webmail8
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ymbk-splusp
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: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:21:57 -0000
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. This document describes a way to extend the IPv4 address space by reclaiming some of the TCP/UDP port bits for use as address bits. The document is well written, and the security considerations seem complete. I see no security issues with this document. --Scott
- [secdir] secdir review of draft-ymbk-splusp Scott G. Kelly