RE: Con-call to review the Security draft's normativestatements

 

A reminder that tomorrow morning is the con-call to review the normative
statements in the security draft. So far 11 people are planning on
attending. 

 

 

Jim

 

 

 

________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Jim Pinkerton
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 12:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [rddp] Con-call to review the Security draft's
normativestatements

 

 

A quick reminder that the con-call is this Thursday, 10am-noon PDT,
noon-2pm CDT, 1-3pm EDT. So far 5 people have asked me for con-call
information. If you'd like to attend please send me email and I'll send
you the con-call information.

 

Note that the call will not be a walk through of all the requirements in
the document. It is hoped that the attendees will come with a list of
concerns/issues against what is currently in the document, so we can
quickly iterate on the issues live on the call.

 

I just submitted the -04 draft on Friday. The main change is that the
appendix on client/server issues has been essentially rewritten from
scatch, with a new direction. It is normative, and been re-focused on
ULP issues when implementing a client/server model. Note that I'd
appreciate input on what should go in this appendix for 7.5.2.2 (there
is a TBD on that one specific section).

 

 

 

 

Jim

 

 

 

 

 

 

________________________________

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Jim Pinkerton
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 4:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [rddp] Con-call to review the Security draft's normative
statements

 

As was discussed last week at the IETF RDDP WG meeting, the latest
security draft revision
(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rddp-security-03.txt)
has changed many of the mitigations in the draft to be normative
statements. In the interest of quickly iterating to a consensus on these
changes, it might be worthwhile doing the first round of iteration on a
con-call.

 

Thus I've set up a conference call on August 26th, 10am-noon PDT,
noon-2pm CDT, 1-3pm EDT, to review any comments people have specifically
around the normative statements made in the spec. There is about zero
normative text before section 7.2.4 (one additional one in section 4.1).
>From there, the general format is explain attack, create normative
counter-measures. If you're short on time, you can just read the
normative counter-measure part. I would propose this meeting *only*
review normative text, to keep it to a tractable amount of time. If you
have other feedback, please either contact the authors directly or send
it to the reflector. If you have feedback on the normative text, if
possible please come with suggested text on how it should be changed.
This will make the call go a lot faster.

 

If you'd like to attend, please send me mail for the conference-call
information. All comers are welcome. Note that this call will not be
used to achieve formal work group consensus - that can only be done by
the chair, on the reflector. Thus not attending (or attending!) the call
does not in any way restrict what you want to bring up on the reflector.

 

 

 

Jim Pinkerton

_______________________________________________
rddp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp