Re: [secdir] addresses to send reviews to

Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com> Fri, 22 February 2013 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <turners@ieca.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 B86A121F89B9 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 14:30:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.767
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.767 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.498, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EA48GuzsGY-c for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 14:30:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gateway16.websitewelcome.com (gateway16.websitewelcome.com [67.18.137.88]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6E421F890D for <secdir@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 14:30:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gateway16.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id 4BF3F551BC9F1; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:30:12 -0600 (CST)
Received: from gator1743.hostgator.com (gator1743.hostgator.com [184.173.253.227]) by gateway16.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376E5551BC992 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:30:12 -0600 (CST)
Received: from [108.45.16.214] (port=61838 helo=thunderfish.local) by gator1743.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <turners@ieca.com>) id 1U918U-0001nC-8x; Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:30:34 -0600
Message-ID: <5127F189.2040401@ieca.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:30:33 -0500
From: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130216 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
References: <5127A067.4080308@ieca.com> <F84F1AA7-D439-4FF1-8830-72C39FD7A57A@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <F84F1AA7-D439-4FF1-8830-72C39FD7A57A@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator1743.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ieca.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: (thunderfish.local) [108.45.16.214]:61838
X-Source-Auth: sean.turner@ieca.com
X-Email-Count: 1
X-Source-Cap: ZG9tbWdyNDg7ZG9tbWdyNDg7Z2F0b3IxNzQzLmhvc3RnYXRvci5jb20=
Cc: secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] addresses to send reviews to
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 Feb 2013 22:30:38 -0000

On 2/22/13 5:08 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> On Feb 22, 2013, at 8:44 AM, Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com> wrote:
>
>> is the right one as it allows you to decide whether to also sent to ietf@ietf.org.  But, I'd like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that reviews should be sent to draftname.all@tools.ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org, and iesg@ietf.org.  This way the responsible AD, shepherd, WG chair, and authors get a copy of the review.
>
> And I would like to push back on that. The majority of Secdir reviews fall into two categories:
> a) Good enough, no comments
> b) Good enough, and I found some nits
>
> I see no reason that (a) should be sent to draftname.all@tools.ietf.org and iesg@ietf.org. It is information for the Security ADs, not the authors and not the IESG.
>
> I see no reason that (b) should be sent to iesg@ietf.org. "I found grammar problems" is of no value to the IESG.

The point about "good enough" reviews was also brought up and some felt 
that getting those reviews was of value.  I'm just reminding folks 
what's on: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview

If we'd like to crack open the secdir review process, I'm also okay with 
that.

spt