IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-bbf-bbf-urn-02

"STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com> Mon, 24 October 2016 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <bs7652@att.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 65FB112959C for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:26:12 -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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-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 IU78uLZfPpPe for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7035B12959B for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:26:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049463.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id u9OJOtKw010661; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:26:09 -0400
Received: from alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp6.sbc.com [144.160.229.23]) by m0049463.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 269r279uh3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:26:08 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9OJQ7Dw026370; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:26:07 -0400
Received: from alpi133.aldc.att.com (alpi133.aldc.att.com [130.8.217.3]) by alpi154.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9OJQ1oe026280 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:26:04 -0400
Received: from GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com (GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.itservices.sbc.com [130.8.218.150]) by alpi133.aldc.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:25:49 GMT
Received: from GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.216]) by GAALPA1MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.8.218.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:25:49 -0400
From: "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF Security Directorate <secdir@ietf.org>, "draft-bbf-bbf-urn.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-bbf-bbf-urn.all@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: SecDir review of draft-bbf-bbf-urn-02
Thread-Index: AQHSJguax3h44Iqp3EKwA+fzNOVabqC4Chdg
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:25:48 +0000
Message-ID: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E6114DA25564@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <ab28caa2-ed72-7ef4-065a-bf625a16cd20@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ab28caa2-ed72-7ef4-065a-bf625a16cd20@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [130.10.81.134]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2016-10-24_13:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1609300000 definitions=main-1610240337
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/UWmVapNmRzkuim8bnbELxfQYVN8>
Subject: Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-bbf-bbf-urn-02
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: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:26:12 -0000

> To prevent "URN squatting", I would recommend to include an explanation
> why a name that's not trivially associated with "Broadband Forum" is claimed
> here, namely "dslforum-org". Although 2 minutes of research suffice to find
> the answer.

Thanks for the comment. And sorry for the delayed response. To address this comment. I propose adding the following test at the end of the introduction:
"BBF has used these latter two NIDs for many years without formally registering them and has published widely-implemented specifications that use these NIDs. Use of the 'dslforum-org' NID started prior the organization's 2008 name change from DSL Forum to Broadband Forum. "

From:
   The 'bbf' NID is for new work efforts related to data models for
   protocols other than its CPE WAN Management Protocol (CWMP) [TR-069].
   The 'broadband-forum-org' and 'dslforum-org' NIDs are used for all
   data models related to CWMP [TR-069].

To:
   The 'bbf' NID is for new work efforts related to data models for
   protocols other than its CPE WAN Management Protocol (CWMP) [TR-069].
   The 'broadband-forum-org' and 'dslforum-org' NIDs are used for all
   data models related to CWMP [TR-069]. BBF has used these latter two NIDs 
   for many years without formally registering them and has published widely-
   implemented specifications that use these NIDs. Use of the 'dslforum-org' 
   NID started prior the organization's 2008 name change from DSL Forum to 
   Broadband Forum.  

And additional mention under Namespace Considerations to address Joel's comments. At end of Namespace Considerations, I propose adding:

   Three NIDs are defined. The "broadband-forum-org" and "dslforum-org" 
   (Broadband Forum changed its name from DSL Forum in 2008) NIDs have 
   been used for many years by BBF without formal registration. As they are 
   referenced by multiple BBF specifications currently in common use, BBF thought 
   it best to formalize them. The new "bbf" NID will be used for new work efforts.

Barbara

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email