[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis -- ready with nits
"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Tue, 21 February 2017 17:22 UTC
Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 2D64112943D; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:22:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 Iz4vMVggJMij; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:22:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com [96.6.114.112]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D83B1296CE; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 09:22:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by postfix.imss70 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87510200007; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:22:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com [172.27.22.68]) by prod-mail-xrelay08.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716FE200005; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:22:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; s=a1; t=1487697737; bh=35AeFiLTpBTpoXH3VBWbqvCiQwqGcQlKck2o28C1tZw=; l=4559; h=From:To:Date:From; b=tUtxiMPurNvJ5AiwWW+eLiXZ3Gdgyi1MyJ7HA3AAl9sHfOsSZ+lKczPs6G8ttAWA1 Pt2KfW7Adzf34eR9HpHKTBvwGpoubkyxaAf+AjoIUQwvDm1h7Sqw8wdlKSrb6e8X97 ckWGS3YxyGKW988+QluHCOaUcThYlFcLVuufyGVg=
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com (usma1ex-casadmn.msg.corp.akamai.com [172.27.123.33]) by prod-mail-relay09.akamai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 580601E07C; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:22:17 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1178.4; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:22:16 -0500
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1178.000; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 12:22:16 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis.all@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: secdir review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis -- ready with nits
Thread-Index: AdKMYxPb+Mr9HztxT5aIisKQe4P/Ig==
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:22:16 +0000
Message-ID: <de698290c467420da1cb839bdd98d6cb@usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.33.178]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_de698290c467420da1cb839bdd98d6cbusma1exdag1mb1msgcorpak_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/kBf8-LxJAkCSeG4CAXIX759wZmI>
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis -- ready with nits
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: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:22:22 -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. Summary: ready with nits. Sec 2.1, What's the meaning of scope? Sec 2.2.3, Example 3, should the incorrect example be ":2:1" (i.e., add a missing colon and digit two) Is it worth mentioning that :: is only valid for the ipv6 syntax and not the dotted ipv4 syntax? (Just asking, not recommending) Sec 2.4.1, penultimate paragraph: looks like some words got chopped from the middle line? The security section is fine. -- Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies Member, OpenSSL Dev Team IM: richsalz@jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz