Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 20 January 2016 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8FC1A90FA; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 fGqiokCDFZ6q; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yk0-x22f.google.com (mail-yk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB1421A90CA; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yk0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id x67so16282705ykd.2; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=thYvRdDEGKmaEx4yt+EWXnQ4abBjxVY/iYPCPK8aTPg=; b=YvdKdCGw3mVrEyhyhRNQFU07VaR53e7aE4PKmmDpBWRmlhugAhkf06mbMJEfuyDr8I 9EJbbQ+YUu9Cg7NA4tV30fnnv6pND6yrmldP5y4OYZpavwAyleTUgbCRgo+1E6PlxoS8 apSMcK/DCQLr1dySU9Yf6mh/cZjCqyI9GHlBmTGiK3V4kVpslEkyXxUZSmq1eczc1T8H 5r4E2Z5pxZwUnkM3G3QJ3eqxP2nUKc4hZx8f+V2sdxxf5yCM7Hfvy8DPd6F9WMxpHpa8 H2wb402ESUo21uotFgUsQrpSLqyI9xSk8KqQ/nwalZ5sfqzR4S0wKVDJ0MSWSsA/8KvO iTAw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=thYvRdDEGKmaEx4yt+EWXnQ4abBjxVY/iYPCPK8aTPg=; b=No8gIyoCKvuKc5ma/He6Wj8cZSAuUkidAIngaxi2k6hf8dMKtMhcLR7jhCz/Pra6HI NzYJ60SNASu7nHgc7woJwaJzJLvt3swhB5qy/ymTH8D5yWpSAO6IwjX8c+mHb+J7rQrd UCnRp8mT3QrY/N62b+ySJidHOddLYukzDA9oYxyvipj8NdIev9vTtKsGTaHGBwEvzJ/s LDV26PmzMgvWRRa2hr4HLAOkPBHZIuo9hTZKKkdlMc0hnHdfuqhtp5QVQw/48PbIDHCc yAGrNqxWGAz9yq1eTOvrYF9fHVBbtfJpMpGB2U5BhNqJhM2bTSPVPfObbf8tFaQO0B1U RrnA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmoj6kuUXkcsK6HIJeTdFLJ+vNyi6uovvGDZhjt3pT2vDZFQpyWnqedXoieqFOqvXIWxjkQV9jwP/OItkRc/FwhDa3H/A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.13.210.7 with SMTP id u7mr21120704ywd.100.1453308240054; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.37.99.65 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:44:00 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <D2C14B51.498EA%carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
References: <D2C14B51.498EA%carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 10:44:00 -0600
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-fYhzcPApFsgZMMEO=aWeN00bAmKG9hpP87-ErjhW0Dzg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e7e7865ed930529c6b1de
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/uO1MqbBIxhv7-SUrhDzVIjWf0b0>
Cc: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive.all@tools.ietf.org, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-ippm-active-passive-05
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 16:44:02 -0000

Hi, Carl,

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>;
wrote:

> 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.
>
> This draft aims to provide clear definitions for Active and Passive
> performance assessment as well as defining Hybrid methods and establishing
> means of evaluating new methods as they emerge. The document relies
> heavily on textual references to other specifications, which can at times
> be a bit tedious for the reader but I have no particular suggestions
> regarding this point and it's probably fine for a document that is aiming
> to corral various earlier concepts. The referenced security and privacy
> considerations were very good (if nearly as long as this spec itself). One
> minor point, section 4.2 might be better placed before the current section
> 4.1 to better set-up the ASCII art in section 4.1.
>

Thanks for the review!

Could the authors let me know if the 4.1/4.2 section switch should happen?
No need to submit a revision about that until after the telechat tomorrow,
if the answer is "yes".

Spencer