[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-11

Stephen Hanna <shanna@juniper.net> Tue, 25 March 2014 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <shanna@juniper.net>
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 C12351A0236; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 FZnVlRxbt4vx; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:17:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.207]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D7A1A0231; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 14:17:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail5-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.237) by AM1EHSOBE026.bigfish.com (10.3.207.148) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.22; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:24 +0000
Received: from mail5-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail5-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B834140111; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:24 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.240.101; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:BL2PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
X-SpamScore: -22
X-BigFish: VPS-22(zz9371I542I1432I4015Izz1f42h2148h208ch1ee6h1de0h1fdah2073h2146h1202h1e76h2189h1d1ah1d2ah21bch1fc6hzdchz1de098h1033IL8275dh1de097hz2fh109h2a8h839h944hd24hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh162dh1631h1758h18e1h1946h19b5h19ceh1ad9h1b0ah224fh1d07h1d0ch1d2eh1d3fh1dc1h1de9h1dfeh1dffh1fe8h1ff5h2216h22d0h2336h2461h2487h24d7h2516h2545h255eh25cch25f6h2605h262fh268bh9a9j1155h)
Received-SPF: pass (mail5-am1: domain of juniper.net designates 157.56.240.101 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.240.101; envelope-from=shanna@juniper.net; helo=BL2PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ;
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report-Untrusted: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(164054003)(13464003)(199002)(189002)(51704005)(377454003)(81342001)(74876001)(56816005)(69226001)(74316001)(92566001)(74366001)(90146001)(20776003)(63696002)(97186001)(97336001)(79102001)(2201001)(77982001)(59766001)(49866001)(81686001)(81816001)(80976001)(47976001)(4396001)(50986001)(47736001)(33646001)(83322001)(46102001)(54316002)(19580395003)(56776001)(76482001)(98676001)(93136001)(19580405001)(53806001)(51856001)(2656002)(87936001)(76176001)(86362001)(47446002)(74502001)(74662001)(94946001)(66066001)(31966008)(95416001)(93516002)(54356001)(81542001)(85852003)(80022001)(87266001)(85306002)(74706001)(83072002)(94316002)(95666003)(65816001)(76576001)(76786001)(76796001)(24736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR05MB740; H:BLUPR05MB737.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:FEBCC4DE.D12570A.73D35DB7.44D1D1A1.20290; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
Received: from mail5-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail5-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1395782242696912_5231; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AM1EHSMHS002.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.243]) by mail5-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40EE3E0116; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from BL2PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (157.56.240.101) by AM1EHSMHS002.bigfish.com (10.3.207.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.227.3; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:22 +0000
Received: from BLUPR05MB740.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.208.28) by BL2PRD0510HT005.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.255.100.40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.16.423.0; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:22 +0000
Received: from BLUPR05MB737.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.208.17) by BLUPR05MB740.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.141.208.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.898.11; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:20 +0000
Received: from BLUPR05MB737.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.208.17]) by BLUPR05MB737.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.208.17]) with mapi id 15.00.0898.005; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:20 +0000
From: Stephen Hanna <shanna@juniper.net>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib.all@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: secdir review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-11
Thread-Index: Ac7LmPjydxpNTDH1RCq+bXu7cbCCRR81Jwcg
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:19 +0000
Message-ID: <dd06c63fdda6443a9b612d7270c75017@BLUPR05MB737.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.239.11]
x-forefront-prvs: 01613DFDC8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn%
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/KadlfUkBy0mnrpkzI0AByTfuy4Q
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-11
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: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 21:17:34 -0000

I have reviewed the latest version of 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.

Neither of my comments below seems to have been addressed. In
addition, I did notice a few more typos that have been added
to the Security Considerations section:

* "destine" should be "destined"

* "does specifies" should be "does specify"

* "but these cases will vary dependent" should be "these cases
   will vary depending"

Other than these typos, the document looks fine from a security
perspective. In fact, I'm happy to see more and better commentary
in the Security Considerations section.

Thanks,

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hanna
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 8:29 PM
> To: The IESG; secdir@ietf.org; 'draft-ietf-manet-smf-
> mib.all@tools.ietf.org'
> Subject: secdir review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-mib-08
> 
> 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.
> 
> While I am not an expert in SNMP, SMF, or MANET, I found this
> document to be well-written and easy to understand. More relevant
> to this review, the security of the protocol is adequate and
> the Security Considerations section is exemplary.
> 
> I did notice two typos:
> 
> * In the Security Considerations section, the commentary on
>   smfConfiguredOpMode includes the words "this writable
>   configuration objects define". This should end in "object
>   define", I think.
> 
> * In the Security Considerations section, the commentary on
>   smfNhdpRssaMesgTLVIncluded includes the words "the the".
>   Of course, that should be just "the".
> 
> With these corrections, I think the document is ready to publish.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve