IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis-01

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Tue, 28 April 2009 08:21 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.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 55EA63A6B22; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, 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 psJaBcY-7s2o; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:21:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D033A6B9C; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9B7219871D; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:22:01 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by smtp.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793321986E2; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:22:01 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <49F6BC91.2050404@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:21:37 +0300
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090318)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com>, Vijay Devarapalli <vijay@wichorus.com>
References: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8D97E66FC8E@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com> <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8D9ACEC523A@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8D9ACEC523A@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Cc: "draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis@tools.ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc5268bis-01
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: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:21:10 -0000

Yaron, Vijay,

First, thank you for the review!

I wanted to highlight a historical point, however. I'm not necessarily 
opposed to the new text (in fact, it seems quite reasonable), but I'll 
note that RFC 5268 is just 10 months old, and we had all these 
discussions back then, and the RFC was the result. The purpose of the 
bis is to change one aspect (ICMP to MH) of the RFC.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email