Re: [Tzdist] AD review of draft-ietf-tzdist-service-07 - Sections 8 - 10

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Wed, 13 May 2015 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: tzdist@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tzdist@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42DD41A06FD; Tue, 12 May 2015 23:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 Q7luGeicqh7d; Tue, 12 May 2015 23:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 929621A036A; Tue, 12 May 2015 23:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2417; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1431498383; x=1432707983; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=C43j/N49gdHDcx55UyTZeFeY0saZaMK8lGczc3qowpI=; b=CiRyVCPTfMN5RvnO2WiEM2opt4rYYUYkSlWQYSLNBoZ1CJ8AaqTsP282 AkVt2pCKLIPqmqp/IlupY+6o0qWPGGHdbp+Z1iAxouMwYfBEuF6p/5z5r r4AX4TRNJbJdB4lLSP57x+2OxqG2HPlGRDFKKlTtFPQR5Up2B9JJSWQcP M=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0D5AwB/7VJV/xbLJq1ch1/CCQmHXQKBbRQBAQEBAQEBgQqEIQEBBCNLCgEQCxgJFgsCAgkDAgECAUUGAQwBBwEBiCi1aJI2AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBF4s5hCIRAVEHgmiBRQEEhQePV4E/gmVAgXaCCYElhj4hjnIjggkcgVQ8gT2BOgEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,419,1427760000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="494035407"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2015 06:26:21 +0000
Received: from [10.61.211.148] ([10.61.211.148]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t4D6QLhX015460; Wed, 13 May 2015 06:26:21 GMT
Message-ID: <5552EE8D.5050109@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 08:26:21 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
References: <CALaySJKUcgkMNsFPk0X6ur-Fw0LrB0-miQvAKYJD2rMCEFpBSQ@mail.gmail.com> <88871A9AF67EF351387A3BBF@cyrus.local> <CALaySJLtkDjzeiqDvrAj2e0ubTkcboyqdxffRKEEHqBDKnX77A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJLtkDjzeiqDvrAj2e0ubTkcboyqdxffRKEEHqBDKnX77A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="eSIiD5J9ncSgfLMFthc6x7Lms5uuDSxKb"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tzdist/WkmAKyTZfuLuKwh3b51fJcYzTME>
Cc: tzdist@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tzdist-service@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Tzdist] AD review of draft-ietf-tzdist-service-07 - Sections 8 - 10
X-BeenThere: tzdist@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <tzdist.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tzdist>, <mailto:tzdist-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tzdist/>
List-Post: <mailto:tzdist@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tzdist-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tzdist>, <mailto:tzdist-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 06:26:25 -0000

Hi Barry,

As co-chair..

On 5/12/15 7:15 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Another batch we're almost set on.  I just want to ask one further
> question about the insanely over-paranoid privacy stuff (yes, you can
> infer my view on this, you can...).
>
>> There was a thorough security/privacy review by Daniel Kahn Gillmor that
>> lead to the current text in Section 9 (see tzdist mailing messages with
>> "[saag]" in the subject).
> ...
>> Anyway, I am not sure, beyond some small clarifications, if anything needs
>> to change in this section. Certainly it needs input from SAAG/Security ADs
>> if we do decide to make changes now. Perhaps this should be left to an IETF
>> wide review (with another call to SAAG folks to pay attention to it)?
> I don't have time right now to read the email thread (about to leave
> for vacation until Sunday, back to work on Monday), but I'd like to
> know one thing here: Does the tzdist working group have real consensus
> on all this?  Or did it merely agree to what's there in order to get
> acceptance from the saag folks?
>
>
My honest answer is that nobody objected to the additions, but there was
not what I would call enthusiasm for them, either.  In fact it took the
privacy review from Daniel to really get the ball rolling.  But I think
it's important for the WG to comment right now if people believe the
changes are onerous or will substantially impede implementation or
deployment.

Eliot