Re: [secdir] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11

"Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Sun, 13 October 2019 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
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 4F9F6120033; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 RKFAnzuYM6Bs; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:58:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp13.cnnic.cn [218.241.118.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7EE12000F; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ajax-webmail-ocmail02.zx.nicx.cn (Coremail) ; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 21:58:40 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
X-Originating-IP: [159.226.7.2]
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 21:58:40 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
X-CM-HeaderCharset: UTF-8
From: "Jiankang Yao" <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: "Russ Housley" <housley@vigilsec.com>
Cc: secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version XT3.0.8 dev build 20190610(cb3344cf) Copyright (c) 2002-2019 www.mailtech.cn cnnic
In-Reply-To: <157071977760.20403.2267644082355726284@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <157071977760.20403.2267644082355726284@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-SendMailWithSms: false
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <25e400f9.1403.16dc569fbf8.Coremail.yaojk@cnnic.cn>
X-Coremail-Locale: zh_CN
X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf0BpGL2QLaNdGIqXBA--.6368W
X-CM-SenderInfo: x1dryyw6fq0xffof0/1tbiAQACDSVCN6BTwgABsu
X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Ur529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7IcSsGvfJ3iIAIbVAYjsxI4VWxJw CS07vEb4IE77IF4wCS07vE1I0E4x80FVAKz4kxMIAIbVAFxVCaYxvI4VCIwcAKzIAtYxBI daVFxhVjvjDU=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Mnp-yWlxyaKtvDQ4SMaG4AMOTR4>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
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: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 13:58:51 -0000



> -----原始邮件-----
> 发件人: "Russ Housley via Datatracker" <noreply@ietf.org>
> 发送时间: 2019-10-10 23:02:57 (星期四)
> 收件人: secdir@ietf.org
> 抄送: draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, regext@ietf.org
> 主题: Secdir telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
> 
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review result: Has Issues
> 
> I 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 authors, document editors, and WG chairs should
> treat these comments just like any other IETF Last Call comments.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review Date: 2019-10-10
> IETF LC End Date: 2019-03-15
> IESG Telechat date: 2019-10-17
> 

Dear Russ Housley.
  Thanks a lot for your kind review.

> Summary: Has Issues
> 
> 
> Major Concerns:
> 
> The Abstract ans Section 1 say: "This is a non-standard proprietary
> extension." I understand that this is not a standards track document, so
> the "non-standard" part makes sense. 

yes, the WG decided that this document is informational.

> However, what is the point of
> publishing a "proprietary" extension as an RFC.  I would hope that
> interoperable implementations is the goal of publication.
> 

If the registry follows this document, both registry and its all registrars should follow this document.
Yes, interoperable implementation is very important.


> In Section 1, the use of "policy-wise" is unclear.  Is this registration
> policy or something else?
> 

How about 
 Policy-wise bundling --->
 Bundling based on policy


> 
> Minor Concerns:
> 
> None.
> 
> 
> Nits:
> 
> Section 1: s/label(LABEL)/label (LABEL)/
> - s/(V-tld);/(V-tld)./
> 

will update it.


Thanks a lot.

Jiankang Yao

> In addition, there are several places in the upper left corner of the
> title page:
>    Internet        Engineering     Task Force
> 
>