Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05

[Carl Wallace <[e-mail]>]

Works for me.

From:  "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <[e-mail]>
Date:  Wednesday, January 20, 2016 at 12:03 PM
To:  Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[e-mail]>, Carl Wallace
<[e-mail]>
Cc:  "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]"
<[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject:  RE: secdir review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05

> Hi Carl, thanks for your review.
>  
> Carl and Spencer,
>  
> I think the issue is that “PDM” appears in the
> (ASCII Art) Figure in section 4.1,
> without explaining what PDM is (that happens in 4.2).
> The alternative is to expand a bit on PDM in the explanation
> of the Figure in 4.1.  This way we can leave all the
> methods together following the 4.1 Graphical Representation
> section (with the ASCII art).
>  
>    4 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#section-4>
> .  Discussion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#page-8>
>      4.1 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#section-4.1> .
> Graphical Representation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#page-8>
>      4.2 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#section-4.2> .
> Discussion of PDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#page-10>
>      4.3 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#section-4.3> .
> Discussion of "Coloring" Method . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#page-11>
>      4.4 
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#section-4.4> .
> Brief Discussion of OAM Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05#page-11>
>  
> Ok?
> Al
>  
>  
> 
> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:44 AM
> To: Carl Wallace
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05
>  
> 
> Hi, Carl,
> 
>  
> 
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Carl Wallace <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 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 draft aims to provide clear definitions for Active and Passive
> performance assessment as well as defining Hybrid methods and establishing
> means of evaluating new methods as they emerge. The document relies
> heavily on textual references to other specifications, which can at times
> be a bit tedious for the reader but I have no particular suggestions
> regarding this point and it's probably fine for a document that is aiming
> to corral various earlier concepts. The referenced security and privacy
> considerations were very good (if nearly as long as this spec itself). One
> minor point, section 4.2 might be better placed before the current section
> 4.1 to better set-up the ASCII art in section 4.1.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks for the review!
> 
>  
> 
> Could the authors let me know if the 4.1/4.2 section switch should happen? No
> need to submit a revision about that until after the telechat tomorrow, if the
> answer is "yes".
> 
>  
> 
> Spencer