[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-kuehlewind-system-ports-05

Mališa Vučinić via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 21 February 2020 10:29 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD68A1200DF; Fri, 21 Feb 2020 02:29:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mališa Vučinić via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, draft-kuehlewind-system-ports.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.118.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
Message-ID: <158228099071.29085.17375165161369723615@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 02:29:50 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/iCl9X9CoE-BOsU2VebhzYrngppw>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-kuehlewind-system-ports-05
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:29:51 -0000

Reviewer: Mališa Vučinić
Review result: Ready

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.

The document requests the reassignment of well-known ports in the IANA Service
Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry from individuals or companies
who have registered the port for use before RFC6335 was published to the IESG.
The document is well written. It does not change the use of the ports, and so
does not raise new security considerations, which is clearly described in the
Security Considerations section. As such, the document is ready.