[sipcore] AD Evaluation of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates-06

"Ben Campbell" <ben@nostrum.com> Mon, 20 June 2016 19:26 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E4E912D6B2 for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:26:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.326
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.326 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 RuFFnBYSyAEq for <sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 07B1112D6A7 for <sipcore@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jun 2016 12:26:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.4] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id u5KJQIeQ066849 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Jun 2016 14:26:18 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.4]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
To: draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates-06.all@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 14:26:18 -0500
Message-ID: <2A6BA24D-814A-4B92-A52D-7C861DB77DD7@nostrum.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.4r5234)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/YERrOROEC-qVQrsEqj91Lskr8aA>
Cc: SIPCORE <sipcore@ietf.org>
Subject: [sipcore] AD Evaluation of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates-06
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sipcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:26:21 -0000

(copying sipcore since, even though this is not a wg draft, sipcore 
probably offers the best nexus of expertise.)

Hi,

This is my AD Evaluation of draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates-06. 
I have one substantive comment and one editorial comment. I don't think 
either of these need block IETF last call. They can be handled along 
with any other last call feedback.

Thanks!

Ben.

--------------

Substantive:

The security considerations state that the draft removes some places 
that some of the P-Headers can be sent, but expands that to some other 
places. Further, it says that neither introduce new security 
considerations beyond those in 7315.

I accept that for the reduction part. But I'm not sure we can state that 
sort of thing for the expansion part, at least without some more 
discussion. Since 7315 already acknowledges potential privacy issues 
around P-Access-Network-Info, I'd like to at least see a sentence or two 
about the allowance of that in ACK requests, even if they just say that 
this addition makes things no worse than they already are.

Editorial:

-5, first sentence: "The security considerations for P- header fields 
are defined in
    [RFC7315]"
I assume this means 7315 discusses the security considerations for these 
P-Headers specifically, not P-Headers in general. Is this the intent? If 
so, I suggest:

s/... for P-header fields.../ ... for these P-header fields...