Re: [secdir] [DNSOP] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error-14
Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Fri, 17 April 2020 21:56 UTC
Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
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 6262E3A0942; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:56:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 4doMyQ-NwrRR; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (mail.hardakers.net [168.150.192.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C5EF3A093A; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.0.0.3]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1E78C3112E; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Eric Orth <ericorth@google.com>
Cc: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>, Catherine Meadows <catherine.meadows@nrl.navy.mil>, last-call@ietf.org, dnsop <dnsop@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error.all@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
References: <158566679527.28397.11447221654478370153@ietfa.amsl.com> <yblv9m1u27a.fsf@w7.hardakers.net> <CAMOjQcH9pmiJtzGOH9yArHxq55UURyQU_CNamR+KHNiovH6oww@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:56:22 -0700
Message-ID: <yblr1wln5dl.fsf@w7.hardakers.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Hj-GgTa-HULQeA50eC7cV1X-894>
Subject: Re: [secdir] [DNSOP] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dnsop-extended-error-14
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: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 21:56:32 -0000
Eric Orth <ericorth@google.com> writes: > I have similar objections to this as the similar language that was in the draft > before it was changed to the "MUST continue to follow" language referenced > above. > > Anything similar to "MUST NOT alter ... processing" is vague over what > constitutes an alteration to the processing. I think everybody would agree > that you should be able to log EDEs, so it must be unambiguous that doing so is > allowed. Lots of discretionary room for implementers (especially stub > implementers) to do various things with an EDE while still following the specs > on the important handling of the RCODE as the primary error code. > > Hi Eric, Thanks for the (again) well thought out comments. Do you have a counter proposal sentence that could be added to the security seciton? -- Wes Hardaker USC/ISI
- [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dn… Catherine Meadows via Datatracker
- Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [secdir] [DNSOP] Secdir last call review of d… Eric Orth
- Re: [secdir] [DNSOP] Secdir last call review of d… Wes Hardaker
- Re: [secdir] [DNSOP] Secdir last call review of d… Wes Hardaker