Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch

Ben Campbell <ben@estacado.net> Thu, 14 October 2010 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@estacado.net>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5661D3A63EB; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:40:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UNmxq342Qm9Y; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from estacado.net (estacado-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:266::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50643A6B71; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.15] (adsl-68-94-22-118.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net [68.94.22.118]) (authenticated bits=0) by estacado.net (8.14.3/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o9EHegxL021882 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:40:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@estacado.net)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Ben Campbell <ben@estacado.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik5Pp+exyx4KAA5F7Fzg1_j9BNeZwxanG2=Vy=j@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:40:37 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B52D82C8-007D-45D1-B38E-FD4AB43EBB6A@estacado.net>
References: <7F2072F1E0DE894DA4B517B93C6A0585015BCA1D@ESESSCMS0356.eemea.ericsson.se> <4CAAD4B0.2080807@gmail.com> <AANLkTik5Pp+exyx4KAA5F7Fzg1_j9BNeZwxanG2=Vy=j@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 06:06:11 -0700
Cc: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, The IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, Gonzalo Camarillo <gcamaril@gmail.com>, "draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch@tools.ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-simple-msrp-sessmatch
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 17:40:15 -0000

On Oct 14, 2010, at 12:19 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:

> On the general clarity, I also have to say that I believe that the document
> tipped over the "diff" line somewhere.  That is, as a set of edits it is now
> sufficiently complex that it would almost certainly be better to apply
> the edits and re-spin the whole document rather than provide a set of
> textual diffs in the current format.  If the ADs and WG chairs feel that there
> is no energy to tackle such a major editorial change, however, I certainly
> understand.  It is possible to build up the correct state with the two
> documents;
> it is just more difficult.

Hi Ted,

Do I understand correctly that you mean a respin of RFC 4975?

Thanks!

Ben.