Re: [tcpm] SECDIR REVIEW of draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-10.txt

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Wed, 24 February 2010 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 AF51F28C143; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:50:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.419
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 Lb6UZJ+7dllk; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-iw0-f191.google.com (mail-iw0-f191.google.com [209.85.223.191]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90F9C28C15F; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by iwn29 with SMTP id 29so3546105iwn.31 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:52:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=z6JdkGChGB8IJEjQNF3Al98E7LMbV5bXcfQaC+XyoJ0=; b=OTUWQpd8HuP7k1OEvsnXneOmT2tLMe1rIZ3QMrOocDuBqV5Mx1yZ4jMJXt+vma6z/w s+lZG+Equ/6TwhX3VqBBTJlScSjzlfU7ePPkuBXDvAfbAV7B9mvlKebNs3OIeVd7/hPF alQJjqiEe87eonABJPzvggn3HhNF8Yb1PfRrM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=X39MbOVvKUWS04sEd9yh9mR0MyzaZobEcSs5OrrHcbRBGrTgpJOxtfN/38BCrmnvOt XfZ4pc/wCs1tktlioaKGteKX4aqGGMSVzTSMOqGrdaLeQ6dGawmbe/GBjIpJU+fk2vyg 4neZlJCZ6O8o0cpD3WYb1H4yxzUETESCwC7cU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.231.167.204 with SMTP id r12mr305328iby.31.1267033979492; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:52:59 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B7ACB68.9020503@isi.edu>
References: <a123a5d61002121827y2f2b0256u5859790c06819a92@mail.gmail.com> <4B79A54C.7040107@gont.com.ar> <4B79A9BA.5050205@isi.edu> <4B79AEC8.3030506@gont.com.ar> <4B79B270.5060804@isi.edu> <4B79B7D9.8080909@gont.com.ar> <4B7ACB68.9020503@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 12:52:59 -0500
Message-ID: <a123a5d61002240952u792a1154v2e7b7e945c886aae@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] SECDIR REVIEW of draft-ietf-tcpm-icmp-attacks-10.txt
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: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 17:50:56 -0000

When a document becomes an RFC it is read as a stand alone document
and not in the context of the working group discussions that may have
ended years ago.

If a particular security issue has not been discussed because it was
out of scope, that should be given as the reason that it is not
discussed.


On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Fernando Gont wrote:
> ...
>> Anyway: For the most part I'm wondering if there's any additional text
>> needed to address Phillip's comments. Thoughts? This should be our focus
>> at this point in time.
>
> There were two separate points raised, IMO:
>
> - clarification of the role of this doc's recommendations
>        The WG was aware of this issue, and there was
>        a lot of effort in creating the existing text that
>        already considered this perspective. No change needed.
>
> - addressing the larger issue of the role/need of ICMPs
>        This is out of scope for this doc. No change needed.
>
> Overall, I think there isn't a need for a change.
>
> Joe
>
>



-- 
-- 
New Website: http://hallambaker.com/
View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week,
http://quantumofstupid.com/