Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-12
Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Sun, 30 June 2013 19:22 UTC
Return-Path: <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.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 CC57921F9C01; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 12:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0wOZG34UCWQA; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 12:22:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38A3A21F9C03; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 12:22:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7f826d000001766-c0-51d08560bf12
Received: from ESESSHC003.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 4C.7F.05990.06580D15; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 21:22:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [131.160.126.29] (153.88.183.147) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.29) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 21:22:07 +0200
Message-ID: <51D0855F.60500@ericsson.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 22:22:07 +0300
From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
References: <519097A8.40409@oracle.com> <51CAA254.6040303@oracle.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA43B43D83@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <51CC54B0.3050702@ericsson.com> <CAF4+nEE7E84Cy42mYEQp3RmUOnycr3m6xC8C9rAWK2SykZjw5g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEE7E84Cy42mYEQp3RmUOnycr3m6xC8C9rAWK2SykZjw5g@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrFLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW5i64VAg2f/mSwez13AanFwu6bF vEXb2C1m/JnIbPFh4UMWB1aPnbPusnu0HHnL6rFkyU8mjy+XP7MFsERx2aSk5mSWpRbp2yVw ZTz5dZux4JRExeneS4wNjE0iXYycHBICJhLHj51nh7DFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwmFFi6oFWFghn DaPE/StbmUCqeAU0Jea2fgeyOThYBFQlOrrlQcJsAhYSW27dZwGxRQWiJFp7pzJDlAtKnJz5 BCwuIqAm8Xr5ArCZzAKXGCWat39gBEkICzhIdD26yAqx7AujxKIVe8GWcQoESuxccZMJ4jxJ iS0v2sFOZRbQk5hytYURwpaX2P52Dtg2IQFtieXPWlgmMArNQrJ8FpKWWUhaFjAyr2Jkz03M zEkvN9rECAzvg1t+q+5gvHNO5BCjNAeLkjjvZr0zgUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4 pRoY50+P33r5ziUpt8PH1fLOJv72jCoVdX0pfGDF9/Wbi7pX/VT76/Eh4nNrjP3JvNrWMJeW uZ5Tl/pKfGlp2KLmNP8tj7d57ONZntMXqGgWsUvVN7/WeTPv9e1H/K9fb01eP9fqbuBXfbHo srO8Mz/+mnJxiuTmqcveOsjtXcBb9rraboHCo7Psc5RYijMSDbWYi4oTAR5ze5Y9AgAA
Cc: "draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb.all@tools.ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-12
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: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:22:15 -0000
Hi Donald, sure, that is what I also do in my own documents. Cheers, Gonzalo On 28/06/2013 1:18 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote: > I believe it is always better to bend over backwards, if need be, to > make a document clear. If someone had requested it, I would spell out > any acronym in a draft of mine, not matter how "well known" -- IETF, > IP, TCP, whatever. I believe the correct response to a request to > spell out an acronym on first use is always to simply agree with that > request, as in "RTP (Real-time Transport Protocol)". > > Thanks, > Donald > ============================= > Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) > 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA > d3e3e3@gmail.com > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Gonzalo Camarillo > <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> note that RTP is one of the well-known abbreviations that do not need >> expansion: >> >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-style-guide/abbrev.expansion.txt >> >> Cheers, >> >> Gonzalo >> >> On 26/06/2013 12:46 PM, Qin Wu wrote: >>> Hi,Shawn: >>> Thank for your comments, my reply is inline below. >>> >>> Regards! >>> -Qin >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Shawn M Emery [mailto:shawn.emery@oracle.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:12 PM >>> To: secdir@ietf.org >>> Cc: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb.all@tools.ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org >>> Subject: Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-12 >>> >>> >>> 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 internet-draft specifies a RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report >>> (XR) Block for data on jitter buffer configuration and performance. >>> >>> The security considerations section does exist and states that the new block >>> data does not introduce any additional security concerns than those stated >>> in the base XR spec, RFC 3611. I believe this to be an accurate assertion. >>> >>> General comments: >>> >>> I found the draft slightly hard to read, as the terminology and abbreviations >>> used are not expanded. For example, the abstract has "RTP", but never expands >>> the abbreviation. >>> >>> [Qin]; RTP is abbreviation of "A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications" and defined >>> In the basic RTP protocol specification [RFC3550], it is the basic atom we are used >>> in the context of this draft and can not be decomposed.For other term and abbreviation, >>> I will check and fix that, thanks. >>> >>> >>> Editorial comments: >>> >>> s/[RFC6390]and/[RFC6390] and/ >>> >>> [Qin]:okay.Thanks! >>> >>> Shawn. >>> -- >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> secdir mailing list >> secdir@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir >> wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-sidr-ghostbusters-14 Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-lfa-applicabi… Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-lfa-appli… Stewart Bryant
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-13 Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-manet-smf-13 Joe Macker
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-melnikov-smtp-priority-t… Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-melnikov-smtp-priori… Alexey Melnikov
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-12 Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bi… Matthijs Mekking
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bi… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-karp-ospf-analysis-… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-oauth-assertions-09 Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-oauth-assertion… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-client-l… Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-clie… Gaurav Halwasia (ghalwasi)
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfaces-c… Shawn Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfac… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfac… Benoit Claise
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-netmod-interfac… Shawn Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-… Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr… Qin Wu
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr… Donald Eastlake
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-http-09 Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-ht… Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-ht… Uri Blumenthal
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-ht… Dave Crocker
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-ht… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-repute-query-ht… Shawn M Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-security-req… Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-security… Tal Mizrahi
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-cdni-requirements-13 Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-cdni-requiremen… Kent Leung (kleung)
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-isis-rfc6326bis-01 Shawn M Emery
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-fastopen-08 Shawn M Emery
- Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-fastopen-08 Scharf, Michael (Michael)
- [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-hip-rfc5202-bis-05 Shawn M Emery