[secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-mboned-mcaddrdoc-03.txt

Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com> Tue, 24 April 2012 14:22 UTC

Return-Path: <clonvick@cisco.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 4782821F87FD; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:22:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FNLhobXYYQqw; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-4.cisco.com (mtv-iport-4.cisco.com [173.36.130.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0324721F87F7; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=clonvick@cisco.com; l=803; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1335277356; x=1336486956; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=bHQc1DY7Xl8Rk9CowAIN5jVsUAmnRBKNVEqebt2j6Dc=; b=TAo+/sahgwOpPbApyVP8q5vXv+BerGkp12IBIVHy2gPtE+LAPj5AMu75 Pj+XaRKfD0j4z4FTV8Z+ceXH6FjMWTHacW8KuIEsNtdTN9IgauL1teanW 9gbuElC1PVjMYZyZ9cJBgjAUCRkkoIiBOHLsvcxyirT7nrEgMWGTDGsEM k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApUHAMi2lk+rRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABEoDMBkUOBB4IiASUCgX40h2yaT6BQkVEEiGObbIFpgwk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,473,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="41849910"
Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Apr 2012 14:22:35 +0000
Received: from sjc-cde-026.cisco.com (sjc-cde-026.cisco.com [171.69.20.33]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q3OEMZRh030300; Tue, 24 Apr 2012 14:22:35 GMT
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 07:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Lonvick <clonvick@cisco.com>
To: draft-ietf-mboned-mcaddrdoc.all@tools.ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.63.1204240644540.13737@sjc-cde-026.cisco.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: [secdir] SECDIR review of draft-ietf-mboned-mcaddrdoc-03.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 24 Apr 2012 14:22:38 -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.

Well, this is pretty straightforward.  The document explains that it is 
requesting addresses to be set aside for examples in the documentation of 
multicast.  It goes through each case and lists the addresses that are to 
be used.

I find the document to be well written and to the point.  The security 
considerations section is appropriate and consistent with other IETF 
documents requesting namespace for documentation purposes.

Regards,
Chris