[secdir] Review of draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-17

Shawn Emery <shawn.emery@oracle.com> Fri, 22 April 2011 20:37 UTC

Return-Path: <shawn.emery@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0200E080D; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.559
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id flQQRicumMHR; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:37:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcsinet10.oracle.com (rcsinet10.oracle.com []) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA9FFE07EF; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from acsinet21.oracle.com (acsinet21.oracle.com []) by rcsinet10.oracle.com (Switch-3.4.2/Switch-3.4.2) with ESMTP id p3MKblHk025475 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:37:49 GMT
Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com []) by acsinet21.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3MKbju0022863 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:37:45 GMT
Received: from abhmt018.oracle.com (abhmt018.oracle.com []) by acsmt358.oracle.com ( with ESMTP id p3MKbevg020383; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 15:37:40 -0500
Received: from [] (/ by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 22 Apr 2011 13:37:39 -0700
Message-ID: <4DB1E712.9040005@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:37:38 -0600
From: Shawn Emery <shawn.emery@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110329 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: secdir@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Source-IP: acsinet21.oracle.com []
X-Auth-Type: Internal IP
X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090201.4DB1E71D.002D:SCFMA922111,ss=1,fgs=0
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-17
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: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:37:53 -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 draft outlines best current practices for devices, networks, and 
services to use standards on placing emergency calls over IP networks.

The security considerations section does exist and defers to RFC 5069 
and the geo-priv architecture draft for security considerations.  After 
reading the RFC and the referenced draft, I don't believe that this BCP 
is adding any new security concerns.

General comments:


Editorial comments:

s/[RFC5031]. MUST/[RFC5031] MUST/