[secdir] draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-24

"Klaas Wierenga (kwiereng)" <kwiereng@cisco.com> Mon, 02 December 2013 10:32 UTC

Return-Path: <kwiereng@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716751AE1CF; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 02:32:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 LorLVEfPDls2; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 02:32:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.142.95]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCAE1AE10F; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 02:32:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1043; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1385980364; x=1387189964; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=gibKiDFcavtDKjo9FkHPb30HVgPIHC5QPPr77Wuwf8A=; b=L0LpjygxIVQI0HbWK6QZOOHYhYNO11hQ5i5d6vclR9FZl0+xufkQe5sL mLYHiX0LtJQ16dyGsRW6b4lrJoW9gSIWTDRXAA307vWe4wsenMYztfl/S sbd9k6hSyqmpuUKvDWcMbWUOM/f8+HDruIgnchihswW+iwCT1ft+axmpH g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhcFAHhhnFKtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABZgwc4U7l5FnSCLDpRAT5CJwQBiBO/JheSL4ETA5gUkhODKYIq
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,810,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="3592869"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2013 10:32:25 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rB2AWPw5013227 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 2 Dec 2013 10:32:25 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x12.cisco.com ([169.254.7.149]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 04:32:25 -0600
From: "Klaas Wierenga (kwiereng)" <kwiereng@cisco.com>
To: "draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional.all@tools.ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-24
Thread-Index: AQHO70nKjm63YmI8kkuJgTcGop2QMA==
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 10:32:24 +0000
Message-ID: <48B2E229-DAF9-4FD5-BB42-3B9C55F995A3@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.61.103.112]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <30E342E3E777464BA7D51EB10F58069D@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [secdir] draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-24
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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, 02 Dec 2013 10:32:47 -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.

This document defines HTTP/1.1 conditional requests,
   including metadata header fields for indicating state changes,
   request header fields for making preconditions on such state, and
   rules for constructing the responses to a conditional request when
   one or more preconditions evaluate to false.

I had reviewed version 19 of this draft in the past and I am happy with the changes since. I particularly appreciate the paragraph on privacy in the security considerations. You might want to consider making that a separate section since privacy and security are really not the same thing. Apart from that I believe the document is in a good condition.

Klaas