Re: [tcpm] Feedback request on draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-security

<L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk> Tue, 02 March 2010 08:16 UTC

Return-Path: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
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 2620428C0E9 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 00:16:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 48nzF-GgD6dr for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 00:16:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail114.messagelabs.com (mail114.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.163]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1A8E3A8307 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 00:16:38 -0800 (PST)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-9.tower-114.messagelabs.com!1267517797!53142203!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.39]
Received: (qmail 1114 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2010 08:16:37 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.39) by server-9.tower-114.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 2 Mar 2010 08:16:37 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.49]) by EXHT012P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.39]) with mapi; Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:16:37 +0000
From: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
To: <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:16:35 +0000
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] Feedback request on draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-security
Thread-Index: Acq54Kzv5GucLDKOSXaA8Lz7Jt9q9A==
Message-ID: <4C337366-E8A4-4B6F-AF1F-65E29389D902@surrey.ac.uk>
References: <4B7F2881.7000700@gont.com.ar> <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB47DE76AE73@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>, <FC9BFC61-3E19-48D8-A7A7-505EC0836410@surrey.ac.uk> <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB47DE76AE76@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
In-Reply-To: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB47DE76AE76@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, fernando@gont.com.ar, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Feedback request on draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-security
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: Tue, 02 Mar 2010 08:16:40 -0000

On 2 Mar 2010, at 01:28, Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP] wrote:

> I don't know if you've read the document under discussion, but it already includes a reference to the CPNI security assessment you mention including a reference to, and this reference immediately follows the text I suggested clarifying to identify TCPM as the document source.

No, it includes it as an inline comment - i.e. it does not have the status of an explicit reference. It's already well on its way to being elided as unnecessary as history is rewritten.

> My suggestion was to put a sentence in that makes the context of the document clear,

by removing any mention of security/threats?

> as a TCPM product, with recommendations that have been reviewed by TCPM.  It shouldn't be controversial that the WG takes ownership of a WG product.

You're right, that shouldn't be controversial. That it is says much about the way that this WG takes ownership.

L.

Lloyd Wood
L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood