IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-eai-imap-utf8-07

Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org> Fri, 28 August 2009 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <phoffman@imc.org>
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 DF9FE28C13D for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.548, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 PDGaKGpuADai for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:58:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60AFF28C24E for <secdir@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:57:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.158] (sn81.proper.com [75.101.18.81]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n7SKvX6x090272 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:57:34 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from phoffman@imc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240806c6bdf3e9c412@[10.20.30.158]>
In-Reply-To: <4A98271A.2020601@isode.com>
References: <p0624083ec6bdad5d3ccd@[10.20.30.158]> <4A98271A.2020601@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:57:32 -0700
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
From: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Chris Newman <Chris.Newman@Sun.COM>, Xiaodong Lee <lee@cnnic.cn>, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-eai-imap-utf8-07
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: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:58:08 -0000

At 7:51 PM +0100 8/28/09, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>While I agree that these should have been fixed, I personally don't think it is a big deal.

Nor do I, that's why I didn't send this to the IESG or the IETF general list. However, Tim and Pasi have asked SecDir reviewers to comment on all aspects of a draft we are reviewing, not just the security aspects. I did not, for example, comment on the grammar issues that I strongly suspect will be fixed by the RFC Editor. However, if I were an IESG member reading the document for the first time, I would immediately ask why the abstract says "do not deploy implementations of this draft" for something that is meant to be an Experimental RFC.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email