[tsvwg] Paul Wouters' Discuss on draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-zero-checksum-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 12 June 2024 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0157CC151553; Wed, 12 Jun 2024 09:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Paul Wouters via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.15.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <171820843899.39049.3184675366874098070@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 09:07:19 -0700
X-MailFrom: noreply@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tsvwg.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-zero-checksum@ietf.org, tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Reply-To: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
Subject: [tsvwg] Paul Wouters' Discuss on draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-zero-checksum-10: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/nX2ZYgTzTG6jNVatfQ8K4r6501s>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tsvwg-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tsvwg-leave@ietf.org>

Paul Wouters has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tsvwg-sctp-zero-checksum-10: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


Should there be a short discussion in the Security Considerations on what to do
when DTLS fails? This could be a bid-down attack from DTLS to crc32. Perhaps
some text that states if DTLS is configured, that if DTLS fails to establish,
this should be a hard fail and not a soft fail to crc32 'protected' clear text?



        A Virtual Network (VN) is a network provided by a service provider
        to a customer for the customer to use in any way it wants.

I think "any way" is a bit too strong? Service providers have a lot of AUP and
fine print.

being being received -> being received