Re: [tcpm] comments on draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-05

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Sun, 14 June 2009 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@ISI.EDU>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E27C28C0F7 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 08:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.433, BAYES_00=-2.599, URIBL_RHS_DOB=1.083]
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 Ql-wT+-PCaLY for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 08:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2897A28C0ED for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 08:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.46] (pool-71-105-84-152.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.105.84.152]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5EF1RLJ024898; Sun, 14 Jun 2009 08:01:29 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A3510C7.4050105@isi.edu>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 08:01:27 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
References: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53C@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov> <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53D@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
In-Reply-To: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB221796D53D@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, Fernando Gont <fernando.gont@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] comments on draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-05
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:02:00 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[Verizon] wrote:
> As both co-chair and TCPM participant, I'm not really
> comfortable with Appendix B of this document which
> reads a lot like an advertisement.  Even though I
> know it's well-intentioned, it seems like we'd set
> a bad precedent if we got into the habit of putting
> sponsor-plugs into the appendices of our documents.
> I don't think we lose anything by leaving that
> appendix out completely.
> 
> What does the WG think?

I think it ought to be OK to say "this work supported by..." or other
disclaimers in the Ack's section.

The text in question is more than a plug; it's recommended action.
That's clearly out of scope for an informational doc; it would require
BCP status to have such guidance, and the WG would need to agree that
such guidance is appropriate.

In general, it's also far too specific -- i.e., such guidance is more
appropriately "contact the authorities and report...", and would then
give a list of appropriate entities, rather than endorsing or
recommending a single party.

Joe

> To speed analysis, the text in question is:
> 
> Appendix B. Advice and guidance to vendors
> 
> 
>    Vendors are urged to contact CPNI (vulteam@cpni.gsi.gov.uk) if they
>    think they may be affected by the issues described in this document.
>    As the lead coordination center for these issues, CPNI is well placed
>    to give advice and guidance as required.
> 
>    CPNI works extensively with government departments and agencies,
>    commercial organizations and the academic community to research
>    vulnerabilities and potential threats to IT systems especially where
>    they may have an impact on Critical National Infrastructure's (CNI).
> 
>    Other ways to contact CPNI, plus CPNI's PGP public key, are available
>    at http://www.cpni.gov.uk .
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko1EMcACgkQE5f5cImnZrvVWgCgr3k3VWTCMSIo+3sZuVo4cIz+
9NgAoKO6hTQlr1+Aq1aXkqy7O+M/0iTQ
=ryEZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----