[secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-intarea-hostname-practice-03
Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 12 January 2017 19:01 UTC
Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
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 197201294E3; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 TVzVKJt5jsJX; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6981512947F; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id k15so26967379qtg.3; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0ua2NWC/Db/zR4/cBj/nhmRdVvoCRJ9brFA9D6RvvfA=; b=JgsQ1jLNHTh7+01jmWXVIVmuBww0ByT6mFCtkdzEEVRyJJq7IVlLTrfRlzRM4groO4 IKbdcyPYvBwjwWJe++f2+PZXCYMWwwULj3Bs2slGVgJDO+0alVmJbIhAk4p4u2+hXUjE HD8tgxNIJUxMRg9gBgvQZTNcTxYxaWkxix92ID3mlsTKxgLKlHOFrCBw4/QEiMQ5FkKj 6xBa1K6loXFK/8t7jzb7BvsRtSSsaoM9WTpznGdFY/X+88D545+hHNuAtqCR8j/ifBm8 C4g3GWV4A+LHBzHnSvubgATpWjCGxTDcoY7hKrJX6UEbIeYmw27yW4vyqbGzHGlKkWCp 29bw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:from:date:message-id:subject :to:cc; bh=0ua2NWC/Db/zR4/cBj/nhmRdVvoCRJ9brFA9D6RvvfA=; b=iZzNtplL1nCVTq7U+MufyEPw8pmKts0giQ3aTCMEtgWYFetTNsyS4fLQheIHqSEkMj 7/ME23FGvdAZ+hriw1tf2UyHq4/Pw6nWs0+uonfKOgP7m7Gq6L3pqj2IArLHaNtXmS/x veVtL+i12wrU6XVOwoAtC+o+/Cc/MZzdQ1VLF693iVGiugXM93kwGodOZYzCPC5o5cKN 4Nx9MdyBn+/CYii+yRq/aQq1pbPVLZCQm6R0z71h1t64n0gmUQcrhlh2b4GsxbIDwXUu WhtLfI9baoPq1aT9PU1thzoMnqFg6b13UUGKldWH0acO+S3KQwllRObOeMaerERuMNZP A4Uw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIGTtyAZ8gOYyhszcNMVJoZFQNxkl9en6cdVhJoZICHZRqUfozFUhsw7CIgk2FJLqSz8gLYgbwbx7w6lg==
X-Received: by 10.237.44.228 with SMTP id g91mr13861754qtd.184.1484247678404; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.140.19.72 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:01:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:01:17 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: jurKazU58M3cm0OIwTvfqYbRzkU
Message-ID: <CALaySJ+s858iVb6c3ZjyiyOCYa7qO3GejunoqoYOaTQ7wejUaQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: draft-ietf-intarea-hostname-practice.all@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Q3vXZsiHBVJPm3CNSNg6hlHsm-Q>
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-intarea-hostname-practice-03
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 19:01:21 -0000
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 is ready. I see no issues with the document, and every reason to approve it as Informational tout de suite. Barry