IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com> Mon, 07 March 2016 12:51 UTC

Return-Path: <rmohanr@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: siprec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: siprec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A181B409C for <siprec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:51:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 R9XU99Y6o-tr for <siprec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:51:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D41921B4097 for <siprec@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 04:51:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1593; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1457355075; x=1458564675; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=aDLKaTRqPKilmq+taS6kN4XeuA26M8eCY9o91HzYz1k=; b=C4gFJZGmqMjUn5hReHQePD2W+k+HZfTaBH/94IBiFKaIzyliukhsNSFY ead3j7WGCmqtOMuUm7dPXNw+wUwsc2VYPi1ApDZo4SKecIP7iBRi7GXs+ tUweODmIVcnbhdyEZlaGI08+kt7LzP+uxAdsL+SsCkMEwcE5k2UD8GUnk E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D8AQBReN1W/5ldJa1dgzqBPwa4J4ITAQ2BaYYPAoEmOBQBAQEBAQEBZCeEQQEBAQQOLCsUDAQCAQgRAwECHxAyHQgCBA4FiCK/VgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEXilSEJIRQAQSXKgGNbIFjh2mFLo5UAR4BAUKCMIE0aogDPH4BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,551,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="78149097"
Received: from rcdn-core-2.cisco.com ([173.37.93.153]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Mar 2016 12:51:14 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-017.cisco.com (xch-aln-017.cisco.com [173.36.7.27]) by rcdn-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u27CpFB1020259 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 7 Mar 2016 12:51:15 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-017.cisco.com (173.37.102.27) by XCH-ALN-017.cisco.com (173.36.7.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 06:51:14 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-017.cisco.com ([173.37.102.27]) by XCH-RCD-017.cisco.com ([173.37.102.27]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 7 Mar 2016 06:51:14 -0600
From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <rmohanr@cisco.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Thread-Topic: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHReHAIv2yNZDyHu0OwD+7FeeyClA==
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:51:14 +0000
Message-ID: <D303791D.53A11%rmohanr@cisco.com>
References: <20160302110853.23213.23639.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D2FD2694.5326B%rmohanr@cisco.com> <56D9989F.1010103@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <56D9989F.1010103@cs.tcd.ie>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.1.160122
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.65.81.136]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <C73D542310AB8D4FBC195DCCA57F3F0D@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/siprec/5MEgdHqJjq2mh0H4UvcojLgYzr8>
Cc: "siprec@ietf.org" <siprec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: siprec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Recording Working Group Discussion List <siprec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/siprec>, <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/siprec/>
List-Post: <mailto:siprec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/siprec>, <mailto:siprec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 12:51:17 -0000

Ok. I will add the below text to the security consideration section.

Ram

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Friday, 4 March 2016 at 7:45 PM
To: Cisco Employee <rmohanr@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-siprec-metadata@ietf.org"
<draft-ietf-siprec-metadata@ietf.org>, Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>,
"siprec-chairs@ietf.org" <siprec-chairs@ietf.org>, "siprec@ietf.org"
<siprec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-siprec-metadata-20:
(with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

>>Some implementations may have the SRC choose parts of metadata that
>>      can be sent to the SRS.  In other cases, SRCs may send metadata
>>that
>>      is not appropriate for the SRS to record.  Which metadata is
>>actually
>>      recorded by the SRS must be carefully considered to balance privacy
>>      concerns with usability.  Implementations MUST control what
>>metadata
>>      is recorded, and MUST NOT save metadata sent by the SRC that does
>>not
>>      conform to the recording policy of the SRS.  Metadata in storage
>>      needs to be provided with a level of security that is comparable to
>>      that of the recording session.
>>Would this be better ? Or else we will have to replicate most of the text
>>from Protocol to here again.
>
>Yes, that's good, and no I'd not replicate text from the protocol
>spec, your reference with a MUST above is fine. (I re-read the
>security considerations of the protocol spec, and I think it covers
>things well enough.)
>
>Thanks,
>S.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status