IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [stir] Setting Direction for the STIR WG Last Call

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 18 August 2016 01:21 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFA0D12D0FD for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.198 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_MSPIKE_BL=0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L5=0.001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net
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 G2-JeIjEJN2R for <stir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (unknown [72.52.113.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5386B12B04B for <stir@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id u7I1LN63006602 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:21:23 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1471483284; bh=VlvP+Sbine3h5fYCKTW1eEMne+s3Pi3BThIEm3/oshI=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Reply-To:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=rgVSIso28NuytWUcDrpuyUnNst2nag+TLnGbTzAKytK8t1Ui76oJT95k/X+Cx72+F LffcK5Tg7XSG6XQrJ11FONYtvk137mg6IQ5MLBiTcyaZhto11GfjSCnlZ1NriS1Udw wNzlRExlGh5YLf2EXG+qwPlCKBwjfdv8RVTNmB9g=
To: "DOLLY, MARTIN C" <md3135@att.com>
References: <07e0eb16-6758-cdf1-c571-1f1ed768e741@dcrocker.net> <D9E1B04E-EE62-44AD-B98E-05A264FD044C@vigilsec.com> <2D7E9FF7-6121-4E0C-BBCA-FD730F252713@brianrosen.net> <9e8d2b2c-2735-d8db-0682-755ff294f9f8@dcrocker.net> <CAOPrzE0KKxVUBwczqP7xrJ6BJHnjHu0D+f=KpqkPnHLsQorXAA@mail.gmail.com> <4cd5cefb-59a1-f8d8-5bcd-e49cdbad2132@dcrocker.net> <437A953E-7F03-4FD8-B360-40C82D194DCB@att.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <388ce8e2-c1ff-f281-9471-a18595481f9e@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:21:06 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <437A953E-7F03-4FD8-B360-40C82D194DCB@att.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stir/PvnkIlAUhVgPaPRhxjChTBH9hbU>
Cc: IETF STIR Mail List <stir@ietf.org>, Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>
Subject: Re: [stir] Setting Direction for the STIR WG Last Call
X-BeenThere: stir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: Secure Telephone Identity Revisited <stir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stir/>
List-Post: <mailto:stir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stir>, <mailto:stir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 01:21:20 -0000

On 8/17/2016 6:03 PM, DOLLY, MARTIN C wrote:
>
> No disrespect sir, but who other than you see that a major rework is
> required.


Martin,

A number of folk who chose to comment privately.  I wonder why they 
don't feel comfortable posting their thoughts publicly?  This is such an 
inviting environment for candid technical exchange.

In fact from what I can tell, these documents have received precious 
little diligent, in-depth review, with a serious concern for their 
intelligibility and comprehensiveness to developers new to these 
documents.

So I'll suggest that some of you take the time to look carefully at my 
comments.  Feel free to filter your reading and only look for whatever 
you consider to be 'major' objections.

And then respond thoughtfully on the list with informed analyses of why 
those objections are not correct or, at least, not worthy of further 
consideration.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email