Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5436E3A6DFE for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.562 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.562 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.037, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 ynKJHA5QnpJv for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qw0-f44.google.com (mail-qw0-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54B1F3A6EE8 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qwc9 with SMTP id 9so669914qwc.31 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NkX1VMpZzNz9Mu3bbJYblQnIjCn+BtK7PMwQWbxOpI4=; b=NGKt8+RCAjPD6HsrEVkegb76g/sPJ35pX0HsOysib0bVirRKEZqAPkawfE9Fsl5bxu RjLdrEVCCcTLGDNgXaLAi+PLpdQQMFPgA0N3XP26oKSco3eCcGkJdDmg6WlGbXFTduFY JIkwNKBgxISz1dLA6JfFB/sJLuVjEFRFYadfc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=kkzlx+PmXEYEi8G2ZTo2vUQ11eGBM2fMfMZp1pI9cSkm/ej6d5VoMWmR6Je/PQNu1w XHzjwGPbGURtF55LNPK+7X2C6uBTndgULCo/6KQMxj4MJ38Wv67Y4VYvshv7HXmc7H0p 7oh6Lenb05ObAPagl6Is17yZkOeNDqttwGzBc= Received: by 10.224.60.213 with SMTP id q21mr1351593qah.81.1285774527739; Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbrim-mbp.local (198-135-0-233.cisco.com [198.135.0.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f15sm9572612qcr.25.2010.09.29.08.35.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 29 Sep 2010 08:35:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4CA35CBC.1060901@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:35:24 -0400 From: Scott Brim User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100915 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apps-review@ietf.org, montemurro@rim.com, aallen@rim.com, mdconalddm@hotmail.com, pgosden@gsm.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 08:00:46 -0700 Subject: [apps-review] Q on applicability of http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-05.txt X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:35:33 -0000 Pardon me but I don't understand the use case for this: GSM, UMTS and LTE mobile devices will be interoperating with Internet devices for a variety of voice and data services. To do this, they need to make use of Internet protocols that will operate end to end between devices in GSM/UMTS/LTE networks and those in the general internet. Many of these protocols require the use of URN's as identifiers. Within the GSM/UMTS/LTE networks, mobile devices are identified by their IMEI and IMEISV. Internet users will need to be able to receive and include the GSMA URN in various Internet protocol elements to facilitate communication between pure internet based devices and GSM/UMTS/LTE mobile devices. Thus the existence and syntax of these namespaces needs to be available to the general internet community and the namespace needs to be reserved with IANA in order to guarantee uniqueness and prevent potential namespace conflicts both within the internet and within GSM/UMTS/LTE networks. First, this feels like a layering mixup. When would -- or should -- a communicating peer outside a mobile network need to know the IMEI or IMEISV of a device inside a mobile network? An IMEI is used for initial identification on a mobile network or for SIM-less emergency calls. Under what conditions would an Internet-based peer have an IMEI in hand and want to use it in a gsma: URN? If as you say an "Internet device" is "interoperating" with a mobile device, it will do so using IP-based protocols and will (should) never learn the mobile device's IMEI. I can see cases where an outsourced management entity might want to speak to a mobile network's administration regarding records for a particular IMEI, but it would do so in a very secure way, not using this particular URN. If there is an assumption that we are going to start passing around IMEIs as general identifiers, then I'm concerned that you are engineering a world in which one must reveal permanent identifiers in order to communicate. Please enlighten me as to the intent. Right now it feels to me like it enables us to do the wrong thing with IMEIs. Thanks ... Scott Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F233A6DBA for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:57:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.459 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.140, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 ZYhumImlm2wr for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EF2C3A6DAE for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:57:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.94]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8RJvnmm031501; Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:57:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285617480; bh=ynVFXD04CESa9QJvAGvmtAbGttQ=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=AkLg6C9JH4tbqWnOAQ9b3/UVdLwMQUvJOz9eSNa4DJUINbuniLBEUfhJg6MOCXJxe /kOK5Xz1AFAxvQOHat0Ihx+fJFo4N2Smc6iacK/cU9XyUR8bhftYW7Mgbg/M5ccC1o lMfJ3s58H43xf/9TPuujDnrFedkqC4hckjhq2KFo= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100927121942.0dca81c0@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 12:29:48 -0700 To: Julian Reschke From: SM In-Reply-To: <4CA09D15.5040204@gmx.de> References: <4CA09D15.5040204@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Fwd: APP Area Review of draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-09 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:57:33 -0000 Hi Julian, At 06:33 27-09-10, Julian Reschke wrote: >Subject: APP Area Review of draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-09 >Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:32:45 +0200 [snip] >I have been selected as the Applications Area Review Team reviewer for >this draft (for background on apps-review, please see Many thanks for doing the review. Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B92F33A6A33 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:46:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.456 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.456 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.143, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 V0p7Yrv4FtuF for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F9463A6A61 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:46:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8QAkot5022834 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:46:56 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285498017; bh=EbwYgeAkcPTxX6Xtvke1LkO5nuw=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=VOzmPfAGdBuPqmF4nT4brWNFiYXHKwZMFtk2qpckIjEyQ34kBpvwARMQDuakvHETu p0I7Rh3bUalPQkzV/bnvngxDrbcXl9lTLkku8XqrHAZTgTSFRAMOyiWGoDFgdfMzeo W2CP0JIVETRm9DjdQ0M3Ts5u581MOrdHXz1FM6zY= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100926030819.0720f2b8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 03:39:06 -0700 To: apps-review@ietf.org From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [apps-review] XML expertise X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:46:24 -0000 Hello, We have had several requests for XML reviews during the last months. It has been difficult to find reviewers with XML expertise. I would be grateful if you can recommend reviewers with XML expertise who are willing to join the Applications Area Review Team. Mark Baker was not listed as member of the Applications Area Review Team on http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/applications-area-review-team I apologize for the mistake. Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6AB3A6B88 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.446 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.446 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.153, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 uoEL9vbBKg1P for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9286B3A6B80 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8Q9pruk020044 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:52:09 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285494730; bh=NRXSlZxgbnMTmQimBVvarJNmeG0=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=ZyXSzi2f0CC0UOFPigfXid6Ts4W312r4P4Mxqbj7LJKVTzBK2W3bhp9+2PTariOaE Ydkj09l31TMhgb3jGkWboIO1pOxiwT7D6bLqxaF0t69MdSdpdgvDNpRWzTZebQFO4h xwHOSk2/ci6Hpq7V0bek6kT8KjkJxIbYSgTnprH0= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100926024716.07123398@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:36 -0700 To: apps-review@ietf.org From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [apps-review] Review of draft-arkko-townsley-coexistence-04 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:51:37 -0000 Hello, I will be taking over the assignment to review draft-arkko-townsley-coexistence-04 before October 12. Regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E2E93A6B80 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.453 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.453 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.146, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 g9zQ-INnru4w for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 595503A6B71 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8Q9prui020044; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:52:06 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285494727; bh=v6p7B16TKRmtPOpWZa8D8JxlewI=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=f0MaAtHZkTiYrRPIloWjCAkff3hDO8L8jcNSUJL+uamDdiXj1/Qo+hSm82/jQcE5a /Fqk1FP9nssHAUfZ1ISRtuDFfbQzMYN7ZQkh6jFr/6rOUXNUPYxrQk9BG02IuypTxt FDohwEnvKvsuiKJvrINi/X0nNG75JCuhB0TL3mL4= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100926024324.07123668@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:45:57 -0700 To: Barry Leiba From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Review of draft-ietf-csi-hash-threat-10 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:51:37 -0000 Hi Barry, Peter requested a review of draft-ietf-csi-hash-threat-10 before October 12, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-csi-hash-threat ). Some previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-csi-hash-threat-10". Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD5A23A6B71 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 eEXrRsftLAUr for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4958A3A6B7A for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8Q9prug020044; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:52:02 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285494724; bh=GvBn4xtsWGBXi8NTY/9f5nLUYnA=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=IoxVtGWBP6TkGq3tO2xb5FfdeKSwI114iovak3mYcTYXQdKkRV6IYAP1f6NskvJLs hYtcUHJwBuKGC8TOncCzRpHLttcZ7H87NAz9dSpJzopA8+XFjcTialCbFg/cBG1SVQ HvLApJSWXyZKJizacPHbRn9Q9VT1vA99fo7BuGI8= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100926023446.07122df8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:37:36 -0700 To: Xiaodong Lee From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Review of draft-cridland-acap-vendor-registry-01 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:51:37 -0000 Hi Xiaodong, Pete requested a review of draft-cridland-acap-vendor-registry-01 before October 12, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cridland-acap-vendor-registry ). Some previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-cridland-acap-vendor-registry-01". Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E513A6B67 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.442 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.442 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 035UQML3Pj-8 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750D33A6B11 for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.51]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8Q9prue020044; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:51:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285494721; bh=QcECYY3fyN+VE1tbJSC2tMHRySM=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=A9hROX4CLHvNM7pH4PeZT4GA4VO5T9SDyODwX4+Bg8fw1TegfIuQ02C6P/M5HU/EH TBJtYMjiwOV1k9jnaCf2hTgfxB7NfRJ2UPnkcYeybcDQa3RvcAl+4zppmAI3CHLI3V NudpD3Bjn0hP+rv8pFQe0gI8KOYp8+5bx4cVXwAU= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100926021031.07122b28@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 02:16:39 -0700 To: Joe Hildebrand From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Review of draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update-05 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:51:29 -0000 Hi Joe, Peter requested a review of draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update-05 before October 12, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update ). Some previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-dime-capablities-update-05". Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE0143A672E for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:52:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.438 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.161, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 GamOqGe5e5eZ for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10C1D3A69D0 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.235.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8NLqfDU029401; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:52:47 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285278768; bh=LV7p63fHVH5oY0nC2Tu4tAL57jk=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=fZCX47HkKe0JIj2Zdd44KQgdQeL9Z6ap+kB5F0kANSbt5aBApljK+GNeobPF1gnOr S2GkR+bWZCzfdgZ0pZfo2zVD1C1epR+wcXcu3MSKBdFa5mcRcgln1IGiMWi9fKLavh wChi+fe87RSkpltvnvmpLq3fx+rBoItylZ730mY0= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100923140316.0b261af0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:46:26 -0700 To: Carsten Bormann From: SM In-Reply-To: <7617C75D-7BD7-4010-A989-8705B5696F78@tzi.org> References: <8FE3C30A-D376-4226-B253-208402285032@tzi.org> <201009231239.o8NCd8Hn019039@idle.juniper.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20100923083626.0b2bdb88@resistor.net> <7617C75D-7BD7-4010-A989-8705B5696F78@tzi.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] [apps-discuss] apps-team review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:52:23 -0000 Hi Carsten, At 13:58 23-09-10, Carsten Bormann wrote: >Hmm, I sent it there. >Let me check... Yes, I do receive apps-discuss mail. So it can't >be a non-member reject. If it was a non-member reject, the message would also end up in the moderator queue. >Fluke? Hmm. I just resent it. Let's see whether that copy arrives. I'll wait to see whether the message turns up in the archive. I put in a reference to that message when I update the list of reviews in the tracker ( http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-tracker ). >This is an order of magnitude more work. That may explain why we haven't been able to get a review even though that draft has been assigned twice. >This is a very interesting draft. But it is also massive, bridging >no less than four schema technologies. >I'm not sure I can do this review in a timely fashion. I'll discuss about the alternatives off-list. Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468E53A6AAC for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:12:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.254 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.254 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.345, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 smmIsG49P5aF for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6463A6AEF for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,224,1283731200"; d="scan'208";a="162795471" Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Sep 2010 18:12:50 +0000 Received: from erosen-linux.cisco.com (erosen-linux.cisco.com [161.44.70.34]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o8NICoIs015872; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:12:50 GMT Received: from erosen-linux (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by erosen-linux.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8NICnIL021262; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:12:49 -0400 To: Yves Lafon In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:15:28 -0400. Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:12:49 -0400 Message-ID: <21261.1285265569@erosen-linux> From: Eric Rosen X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:10:41 -0700 Cc: erosen@cisco.com, apps-review@ietf.org, ycai@cisco.com, ice@cisco.com Subject: Re: [apps-review] Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins-01 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: erosen@cisco.com List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 18:12:40 -0000 Yves, thanks for your comments. > Is this going to obsolete the Type 1 S-PMSI Join message defined in > draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-10.txt (using IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses)? No, that is not the intention. If the VPN customer is using IPv4, then the type 1 S-PMSI Join will still be used. The type 4 is used only if the VPN customer is using IPv6. > In the reference sections, links to drafts should be labelled '(Work in > progress)' Well, in this particular case, the referenced draft is already on the RFC Editor's publication queue; also the reference is normative. So labeling it as "work in progress" would not really be appropriate. The RFC Editor will bring the reference up to date when the drafts are published. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF8B3A6B29 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:15:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -9.978 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_111=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] 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 6Y8sfH2oq0-Z for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jay.w3.org (ssh.w3.org [128.30.52.60]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293B03A6B52 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ylafon by jay.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OyoSG-0001Ws-2B; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:15:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 12:15:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Yves Lafon To: alexey.melnikov@isode.com, ycai@cisco.com, erosen@cisco.com, ice@cisco.com, apps-review@ietf.org Message-ID: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:10:05 -0700 Subject: [apps-review] Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins-01 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:15:34 -0000 I have been selected as the Applications Area Review Team reviewer for=20 this draft (for background on apps-review, please see=20 http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/applications-area-review-team). Document: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins-01 Reviewer: Yves Lafon Review Date: 22 September 2010 Review Summary: This draft seems ready to advance, depending on=20 draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-10 Document Summary: This document define a new "S-PMSI Join" message and PIM to extends MVPN=20 to IPv6 flows. There are no apps-related issues in this document. The security section is accuratey referring to=20 draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-10 Major issues: none Minor issues: In the reference sections, links to drafts should be labelled '(Work in progress)' And one question: Is this going to obsolete the Type 1 S-PMSI Join message= =20 defined in draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-10.txt (using IPv4-mapped IPv6=20 addresses) ? Cheers, --=20 Baroula que barouleras, au ti=E9u toujou t'entourneras. ~~Yves Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87FC23A6A51 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:05:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.429 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.429 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 lzxBeRYYqZwl for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:05:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2425E3A69C1 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:05:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.235.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8NG5OHT008690; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:05:31 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285257933; bh=3Wkoh1QEkVLkttgDgFABpvpWzK0=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=4R7ycOWCh+qdcUeSfNOf3SwEXVPTHeEhfiaWdV351KBABkOWmRC47NX4o8A3ttTKa rS0qNLjleRZImuDlZBlyRhDH+QcSmVTLndJ6GcqE1Bt3u1V18WTLy0pHTxetNUp++m svGDO03+nGLc1tjWmobR5r00RSDhxv7XTCDQhijE= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100923083626.0b2bdb88@resistor.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 08:46:40 -0700 To: Carsten Bormann From: SM In-Reply-To: <201009231239.o8NCd8Hn019039@idle.juniper.net> References: <8FE3C30A-D376-4226-B253-208402285032@tzi.org> <201009231239.o8NCd8Hn019039@idle.juniper.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] [apps-discuss] apps-team review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:05:06 -0000 Hi Carsten, At 05:39 23-09-10, Phil Shafer wrote: >Carsten Bormann writes: > >I have been selected as the Applications Area Review Team reviewer I cannot find the review in the Apps-discuss mailing list archives. Could you please re-post the review to that mailing list? >DSDL includes Relax NG, and Relax NG has far better name recognition, >so it was added in parens. I can add text to fully describe this >relationship. draft-ietf-netmod-dsdl-map is pending Apps review. Can I convince you to review that draft? :-) Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3A63A6918; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:32:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 uDE8KHUmBcBt; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:32:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from av-tac-bru.cisco.com (weird-brew.cisco.com [144.254.15.118]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD2C3A6835; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:32:24 -0700 (PDT) X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned Received: from strange-brew.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-bru.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8MMT4Pa027524; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:29:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sweet-brew-5.cisco.com (sweet-brew-5.cisco.com [144.254.10.206]) by strange-brew.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8MMSxnw014263; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:29:00 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 00:28:59 +0200 (CEST) From: Andrew Yourtchenko To: Fernando Gont In-Reply-To: <4C91C9EE.1000200@gont.com.ar> Message-ID: References: <2234.1284367866.672579@puncture> <4C91C9EE.1000200@gont.com.ar> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 08:27:26 -0700 Cc: draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org, Apps Area Review List , The IESG , Security Area Directorate , Dave Cridland Subject: Re: [apps-review] SecDir/Apps Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 22:32:27 -0000 Hi David, sorry for the delay with the reply - I was off the grid for a couple of weeks due to vacation. On Thu, 16 Sep 2010, Fernando Gont wrote: [snip] >> The Cisco-PIX reference does not describe the TCP Urgent behaviour >> except by implication (it mentions adding rules to allow its use for >> TELNET and FTP-PI, but that's it). I have a personal distaste for >> product placement in RFCs, and would prefer that this reference pointed >> at least at a Cisco paper describing default behaviour, etc. >> I comment on this below at [*] >> As an aside, the Cisco instructions actually show the user how to enable >> urgent data on FTP-DTP, rather than FTP-PI, which is incorrect. Could you unicast me the URL where you saw it, so I can work to get it fixed ? The ones in the command reference for the ASA talk about tcp/513, which is rlogin, e.g.: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/asa/asa80/command/reference/uz.html#wp1591004 > > I leave this one for Andrew to answer ;-) > > I'd just note that the reason for which Cisco Pix is referenced is > probably because it's a widely deployed device that scrubs urgent > indications. (i.e., "this thing is widely deployed"). > Exactly. [*] - given the contents of the command reference above - would it correspond to what you had in mind if we give e.g. the link above to one of the command references ? > >> Specific Recommendations: >> >> - An informative reference to FTP and TELNET, noting how and why the URG >> pointer is used, would make it more obvious what is lost here. > > Would the re-written text I indicated above do, or do you think we > should get into the specifics of what the urgent mechanism is used for > in FTP and telnet? > > > >> - A more detailed description of SeolMa, and its implications, would be >> useful, and I think required in the Security Considerations section. > > Please let me know if the change indicated above would do. > > >> - I feel that further consideration of the proposed solution to SeolMa >> is warranted. > > You mean what we propose to fix this NIDS evasion technique? SeolMa was in fact one of the initial triggers of this work, though we deemed the NIDS problem as not something practically solvable in a clean way. I'll include the logic below: First the "classic" NIDS: The setup is as follows: Alice --+-- Eva | Nick Eva is trying to exploit Alice using the SeolMa technique. Regardless of the setup, Nick can not do a lot anyway to help - maybe send a reset based on some heuristic, however the damage is possibly already done, might depend on the timing. So we consider a more interesting case of an "inline" setup: Alice -- Nick -- Eva Here, Nick can have the power to reliably do something. But he needs to consider the following degrees of freedom that Alice has: * /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_stdurg setting. This alters the behaviour box-wide, and Nick would need to know the value of this setting (manual configuration), to understand in which of the two ways to interpret the data. * The timing also plays a role, so Nick would need to somehow normalize the timing of the packets before passing them on to Alice. This can either impact the TCP connection itself (if done with bigger safety margins), or be again unreliable. Or the packets need to be sanitized. * Meantime, Alice might have learned about the SO_OOBINLINE and added that to the code of the next version of the application - which gives another point of manual configuration for Nick. Based on that, there are some approaches to tackling this: * Nick manually configures his behavior to match the Alice's and then does the analysis based on that, trying to guess what Alice's stack would do - and then pass the "sanitized" packets to Alice. ==> while technically this looks sound, I think expecting the end user en masse to know about the details about SO_OOBINLINE/tcp_stdurg is impractical. Even if the "security" folks might know it, in a lot of organizations they are different from "application" folks - the latter not possessing the low-level transports knowledge. Side effect of this is the increase of the complexity of the task that Nick would do, therefore increasing the chances of it not emulating the Alice's behaviour correctly. * Nick can evade the evasion by clearing the URG flag - breaking the assumptions of Eve about the processing of the data by Alice. ==> This requires zero configuration, creates loud noise in the logs of Alice due to incorrect input, but breaks the apps that rely on URG mechanism during the legitimate operation. * Nick can be aggressive on those streams that he knows would not use urgent mechanism (e.g. HTTP), and try to handle the ones that may use it, in a more graceful manner. ==> This looks like a possibly ideal scenario, however, from the security point of view for the applications that use the urgent mechanism, it would need to be treated as the first one - i.e. require explicit manual configuration. So the approach with simply clearing the URG looks like the simplest of all from several viewpoints (reliability, and maintenance overhead). Hopefully this gives more details, would be very useful to know your opinion on the above. Thank you very much! kind regards, andrew > > Thanks! > > Kind regards, > -- > Fernando Gont > e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org > PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 > > > > Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174123A6A70 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:26:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.919 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.680, 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 g9ZsNFII1KxW for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:26:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyrus.dir.garr.it (cyrus.dir.garr.it [IPv6:2001:760:0:158::29]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9F83A69C7 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:26:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webcam1-all.garrtest.units.it (webcam1-all.garrtest.units.it [140.105.201.5]) (authenticated bits=0) by cyrus.dir.garr.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o8MJQjxL093935 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:26:46 +0200 (CEST) X-DomainKeys: Sendmail DomainKeys Filter v1.0.2 cyrus.dir.garr.it o8MJQjxL093935 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=garr.it; c=simple; q=dns; b=f9O4/+3+mLs83MLdMSdY84pHryBgbFjY5+480vqoDhg5dcSth2K2nnOHExmZpl4Yr Hd4wityKV3t9EbaNiloWdSosXkYBqhqfKYg0OlAGmx8jPGxWAfEoZuKOiIJ970PcKow Ftxnr4DvApg4jcoBebruY3Wq7FOFDe2Z9ykMjac= Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:26:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Claudio Allocchio X-X-Sender: claudio@webcam1-all.garrtest.units.it To: Ted Hardie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922093514.072533f8@elandnews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Applications Area Review Team status X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:26:37 -0000 > I actually wondered whether I should send a "caught" message when > the review request to me came in. I understand your concern about delay, > but I think it would be a good idea (on a best effort basis, as for > your reminders > below) if folks agreeing to do a review did say something like "Will > do". I will > do that in future, and I'd suggest others do so as well. well, my guess is that any of us shall send a "got it!" when a request is assigned, it's also a matter of politeness to the review team coordinator :-) Yes, let make it "good practice". best regards to all of you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claudio Allocchio G A R R Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it Senior Technical Officer tel: +39 040 3758523 Italian Academic and G=Claudio; S=Allocchio; fax: +39 040 3758565 Research Network P=garr; A=garr; C=it; PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA5D3A6AE4 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:09:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.424 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.175, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 PEC46hn5oLRO for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA9C13A6B4A for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.238.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8MJ9n8W000423; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:09:55 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285182597; bh=tvG68XtGrUD5akfW2/Y9DkP1AYQ=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=j0Jc31btDP9SFU6knboqAs8BDedjbWNtt6gYDASxgz+udTOOGXosUoLy/FKV8zub1 7VetKS1xTCgMXqd0mGJ9qoC2ZxAEyTmcP66SrBtsMBIn6n2kwvl3D+2KhjMcyMrrsj 1AU6yT0xhsU3d3I89VOs/6X9wOEREdF+DUdf1Vu0= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922113607.073b3ba8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:09:32 -0700 To: Ted Hardie From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922093514.072533f8@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Applications Area Review Team status X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 19:09:36 -0000 Hi Ted, At 11:07 22-09-10, Ted Hardie wrote: >I actually wondered whether I should send a "caught" message when >the review request to me came in. I understand your concern about delay, >but I think it would be a good idea (on a best effort basis, as for >your reminders >below) if folks agreeing to do a review did say something like "Will >do". I will >do that in future, and I'd suggest others do so as well. Thanks for the feedback. It's easier for me if you send a "caught" message as I would be less concerned about the assignment then. As I haven't had regular email exchanges with all team members, I am not familiar with everyone's style of communication. I'll expect a reply within two days before considering a reassignment. as far as possible, I'll send reminders a few days before the assignment is due. I am open to suggestions on how to get the work done. If I am doing anything wrong or anyone has an idea, feel free to drop me an email or post to the mailing list. Best regards, -sm P.S. Thanks to Carsten. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15133A6A70 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.989 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.610, 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 nD0EQ7AHWYqW for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 951593A67D4 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so1098863qyk.10 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=d9iUMDsQUixkCzjbrkqg5VHX2ZzCeDWD3CxCWyc4JR4=; b=t5HPVCqwpaoOqLiWDWA1DZ0khPq8V9wroNbHedVTOvAjdYgMmALo2RriMgb8BsUWLH LlZ/GSF2vxZ/ajFAiibaN4jzxelNjQnKrB/AgrVkWJdBUF1q6UNU4ddB0gm4aH6+eg20 TRRgnTnoMjchwd1bSW4RAo2PUQrXc0g3TtF7k= 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=JSjFl06B3Y0TK+bBRGv9Xd7Mpc4HiinvqfzHa+fE+gwwqr9uYbV3zgQql5ICXVr8KH xe5ytxX4R6q20VLdOXfOgpT8t0vWpjGRtylan3Labttb0fRShaET61o9chEcRvlynAmz QMX00vfpED3RypjepohmHe1Oj07x3eHLxaJPE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.218.69 with SMTP id hp5mr427901qcb.18.1285178868757; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.249.208 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922093514.072533f8@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922093514.072533f8@elandnews.com> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:07:48 -0700 Message-ID: From: Ted Hardie To: SM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Applications Area Review Team status X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:07:22 -0000 On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM, SM wrote: > Dear Applications Area Review Team, > > It has been suggested to me that the reviewer should confirm that he or s= he > is taking the assignment. =A0I don't think that it would be workable in > practice. =A0The deadline for an assignment can be less than a week and t= he > next reviewer would have less time for the assignment if I have to wait a > few days for your reply. =A0If the team thinks that it would be good to w= ait > for the confirmation, I'll follow that practice. > I actually wondered whether I should send a "caught" message when the review request to me came in. I understand your concern about delay, but I think it would be a good idea (on a best effort basis, as for your reminders below) if folks agreeing to do a review did say something like "Will do". I will do that in future, and I'd suggest others do so as well. regards, Ted > My little experience of sending reminders points to it not always produci= ng > the desired results as people might be too busy to respond to them. =A0I = may > send out reminders a few days before the review is due on a best effort > basis. > > You are probably aware that WG Chairs outside the Application Area have > asked the team for reviews of some of their drafts. =A0The team ends up > looking bad if we cannot deliver on that in a timely manner. =A0Our frien= dly > Area Directors have asked for a review of a draft since May 10th. =A0The > review is still pending. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > > 1. http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-tracker > 2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01716.htm= l > 3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review/current/msg00263.html > > _______________________________________________ > apps-review mailing list > apps-review@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review > Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 774043A6A4D for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:59:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.419 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.419 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.180, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 rbpOBKoGGWpR for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243E23A6B0D for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.238.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8MHxmm8028156 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:59:55 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285178396; bh=Ie32/KjF64ZC897NBT2/bsl8jJs=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=iwf3+5q4IiLVNs0v4xlEr9IIk9nJqenuphmv/+E6h61EsLoSSrzSYbckV4gPy+TgI GN+YbQpLv99ZcwJpxT6SFarwmxf0A5lJF3IyBcekpLSH7rvmN9Tzdig4lEPGkpn99a wizIxtEF1I+nukOpldtbDLmBWCCgHPBy6i71bhDc= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922093514.072533f8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:59:11 -0700 To: apps-review@ietf.org From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: [apps-review] Applications Area Review Team status X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 17:59:31 -0000 Dear Applications Area Review Team, I'll start this message by saying that Applications Area Review Team would not exist without you volunteering to put in the time and effort to get the work done. The team has been very active this month. We got seven reviews done [1]. Dave Cridland deserves a special note for doing two reviews out of that. There are still some reviews that are pending. I'll list them in the monthly report to the Apps-discuss mailing list [2]. The objective of the Applications Area Review Team is to provide reviews. I read that as meaning that, you have implicitly accepted to do the reviews that are assigned to you. On May 17th, I posted a message about how the team could get the work done [3]. I mentioned that you could notify me in advance if you are going on vacation or you cannot take up assignments. If an expert review is needed and the assignment is not within your field of expertise, please let me know. It has been suggested to me that the reviewer should confirm that he or she is taking the assignment. I don't think that it would be workable in practice. The deadline for an assignment can be less than a week and the next reviewer would have less time for the assignment if I have to wait a few days for your reply. If the team thinks that it would be good to wait for the confirmation, I'll follow that practice. My little experience of sending reminders points to it not always producing the desired results as people might be too busy to respond to them. I may send out reminders a few days before the review is due on a best effort basis. You are probably aware that WG Chairs outside the Application Area have asked the team for reviews of some of their drafts. The team ends up looking bad if we cannot deliver on that in a timely manner. Our friendly Area Directors have asked for a review of a draft since May 10th. The review is still pending. Regards, S. Moonesamy 1. http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-tracker 2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01716.html 3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review/current/msg00263.html Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4243A6AA5 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:32:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.414 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.414 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.185, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 eczeRL9m3SkS for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72F6A3A6A75 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.238.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8MGWnsB022396; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:32:58 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1285173180; bh=G77JnNe0wuBLf/A6u+lFqFAIw1I=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=e6m4H6+kPXhatAPCOKacb7W5Q4Bk8x2aLBFseqgW4PrVxT60ewOVjz/cJ6vRxYhQz dXjo70d7UYSLdx8swi4A+4yJNVbsQoKFBs4CDJwEteAPWdcEbSEFJuZxbttAB5gO+R 9H634XzLfk5IM9mZ1EAdKb9v/fHfwnr0yrW/V/MA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100922092520.0bf30138@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:29:33 -0700 To: Eric Johnson From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <4C9792AF.5080203@tibco.com> References: <4C9792AF.5080203@tibco.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] New posting of the "jms" URI scheme X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 16:32:38 -0000 Hi Eric, At 09:58 20-09-10, Eric Johnson wrote: >At the suggestion of Alexey Melnikov, I'm submitting this draft to >this list, as well as the uri-review mailing list. The review of draft-merrick-jms-uri-09 has been assigned to Mark Nottingham. Regards, S. Moonesamy On behalf of the Applications Area Review Team http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/applications-area-review-team Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BCF13A69DA; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 06:23:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, 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 R7KPz4hp0eoP; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 06:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.nist.gov (rimp2.nist.gov [129.6.16.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13833A69C9; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 06:23:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from WSXGHUB1.xchange.nist.gov (WSXGHUB1.xchange.nist.gov [129.6.18.96]) by smtp.nist.gov (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o8MDN5L2024652; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:23:06 -0400 Received: from MBCLUSTER.xchange.nist.gov ([fe80::41df:f63f:c718:e08]) by WSXGHUB1.xchange.nist.gov ([129.6.18.96]) with mapi; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:23:05 -0400 From: "Polk, William T." To: Fernando Gont , Dave Cridland Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:23:03 -0400 Thread-Topic: SecDir/Apps Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06 Thread-Index: ActVeWYs8zn5Bzk5TdCwDvjeBWZXwwE3+Kfw Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4C91C9EE.1000200@gont.com.ar> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-NIST-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-NIST-MailScanner-From: william.polk@nist.gov X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 08:07:14 -0700 Cc: "draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org" , Apps Area Review List , The IESG , Security Area Directorate Subject: Re: [apps-review] SecDir/Apps Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:23:07 -0000 Hi Fernando, My comments inline, text pruned to those issues I am responding to... On 9/16/10 3:40 AM, "Fernando Gont" wrote: =20 >> The TCP urgent mechanism, as implemented, means that a single octet is >> lost when the receiver handles the last "Urgent" data section. Thus >> particularly when multiple urgent data segments are "in flight", it >> becomes difficult to guess which octets will be lost by the receiver. >> The SeolMa attack effectively uses these lost octets to pad strings used >> in TCP based application protocols, thus defeating na=EFve NIDS pattern >> matching. >>=20 >> There is no discussion in the draft about SeolMa, indeed there isn't >> even a mention of it in the Security Considerations. >=20 > The security considerations does mention the problem of NIDS-evasion, > although it only focuses on the semantics of the UP (but does not > consider the OOB vs. in-band thing). Would re-writing the SecCons as > follows address this point?: >=20 > ---- cut here ---- > Multiple factors can affect the data flow that is actually delivered to > an application when the TCP urgent mechanism is employed; namely, the > two possible interpretations of the semantics of the Urgent Pointer in > current implementations (e.g., depending on the value of the tcp_stdurg > sysctl), the possible implementation of the urgent mechanism as an > Out-Of-Band (OOB) facility (vs. in-band as intenteded by the IETF > specifications), and middle-boxes (such as packet scrubbers) or the > end-systems themselves that could cause the "urgent data" to be > processed "in band". This might make it difficult for a Network > Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) to track the application-layer data > transferred to the destination system, and thus lead to false negatives > or false positives in the NIDS [CPNI-TCP] [phrack]. > ---- cut here ---- >=20 I think this is a helpful change. >=20 >> It's not clear to >> me if the recommendation to use SO_OOBINLINE would have an effect here - >> my gut feeling is that it would defeat SeolMa by making these "lost" >> octets part of the normal data flow again. >=20 > This wouldn't help for the challenge that NIDS face. This just helps in > terms of interoperability: i.e., applications should still work if those > "urgent data" are delivered in-band (whether because of setting > SO_OOBINLINE or because a packet scrubber cleared the URG bit). >=20 >=20 >=20 >> Cisco's solution relies on simply forcing urgent data to be non-urgent, >> which will have knock-on effects on TELNET and FTP by default. It's not >> clear to me from this document (including reading the references) >=20 > How about if I replace this sentence of the SecCons: >=20 > ---- cut here ---- > However, this > might cause interoperability problems or undesired behavior in the > applications running on top of TCP. > ---- cut here ---- >=20 > with this one: >=20 > ---- cut here ---- > However, this might cause interoperability problems or undesired > behavior in those applications that rely on the TCP urgent mechanism, > such as Telner [telnet] and FTP [ftp] > ---- cut here ---- >=20 > ? I think this is also a helpful change. >=20 >=20 >> Specific Recommendations: >>=20 >> - An informative reference to FTP and TELNET, noting how and why the URG >> pointer is used, would make it more obvious what is lost here. >=20 > Would the re-written text I indicated above do, or do you think we > should get into the specifics of what the urgent mechanism is used for > in FTP and telnet? >=20 >=20 It might be worth highlight FTP and TELNET in Section 5, since these are evidently common applications that use the urgent data feature. >=20 >> - A more detailed description of SeolMa, and its implications, would be >> useful, and I think required in the Security Considerations section. >=20 > Please let me know if the change indicated above would do. >=20 >=20 >> - I feel that further consideration of the proposed solution to SeolMa >> is warranted. >=20 > You mean what we propose to fix this NIDS evasion technique? >=20 At a minimum, I think the implications of this document and any impact on SeolMa are needed to complete the security considerations section. > Thanks! >=20 > Kind regards, > -- > Fernando Gont > e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org > PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 Thanks, Tim Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30B813A6B05 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:02:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 j5QolyM3F875 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1-app.tibco.com (mx1-app.tibco.com [63.100.100.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A803A6ACC for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:59:15 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.56,394,1280732400"; d="scan'208";a="16300011" Received: from tibco-5.tibco.com (HELO na-pa-fe01.na.tibco.com) ([63.100.100.5]) by mx1-app.tibco.com with ESMTP; 20 Sep 2010 09:57:39 -0700 Received: from koosh.na.tibco.com ([10.98.32.22]) by na-pa-fe01.na.tibco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:57:38 -0700 Message-ID: <4C9792AF.5080203@tibco.com> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:58:23 -0700 From: Eric Johnson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100913 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: apps-review@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Sep 2010 16:57:38.0296 (UTC) FILETIME=[EE3D1780:01CB58E4] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-10.0.0.1412-6.500.1024-17654.005 X-TM-AS-Result: Yes-17.867600-8.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No Subject: [apps-review] New posting of the "jms" URI scheme X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 17:02:16 -0000 At the suggestion of Alexey Melnikov, I'm submitting this draft to this list, as well as the uri-review mailing list. Please send along your comments. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-merrick-jms-uri-09 This version addresses a bunch of concerns raised privately in email by members of the IETF, mostly around the question of how to compare two "jms" URIs, as well as removing non-normative uses of RFC 2119 language. -Eric. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE00C3A68D3; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:29:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.381 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.381 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.218, 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 ikovs6iBZzvn; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-gw0-f66.google.com (mail-gw0-f66.google.com [74.125.83.66]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50B7F3A68C0; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11so199710gwb.1 for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:30:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9e/H+/CVfJsWRQroIrwzifStSDjbbxIXrUuTDDAqoY0=; b=NSwApBHsVg5gKDM6U7MNMuPg0BT2C+hIwcvPqU7pm/NU+qUTB7KSo1raYcLU+5omHn TwwLZ3epKXEdusWl0F4Hi7EOJgkF0UQAaq2Pe5UIOQJEvBhti46YVUZedqLTnS7MZKQv zNGFKa9+O73Sid0eBjtnJVlkN3s7N5U0SpYyw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=A5qCvmDgQDgSR/Gz0d3V/WILSK/PLk9KheVrwTWKPdku3jtwZYoL20+te9IqYTeDug P0LTQVtombISe8D7rUZYfwdzTLR8jP7c5HmCnQM3Xb95CBnC3FH1F6nXul5qUdVAlzUV PYyRKbFOEoOM7ctAvvG9eeStPQyMJd/QMrPeg= Received: by 10.151.101.18 with SMTP id d18mr3309701ybm.277.1284625805197; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.4] (55-173-17-190.fibertel.com.ar [190.17.173.55]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t20sm7241104ybm.17.2010.09.16.01.29.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 16 Sep 2010 01:30:03 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Fernando Gont Message-ID: <4C91C9EE.1000200@gont.com.ar> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 04:40:30 -0300 From: Fernando Gont User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Cridland References: <2234.1284367866.672579@puncture> In-Reply-To: <2234.1284367866.672579@puncture> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: id=D076FFF1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 08:10:52 -0700 Cc: draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org, Security Area Directorate , The IESG , Apps Area Review List Subject: Re: [apps-review] SecDir/Apps Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 08:29:42 -0000 Hi, David, Thanks so much for your feedback! Please find my comments inline.... > Simply dropping TCP Urgent data facilities removes an aspect of TCP > which - whilst not commonly used in most modern protocols - is > nevertheless still used for useful gain in FTP and TELNET. Actually, support for urgent data is not removed. We simply discourage its use. > The TCP urgent mechanism, as implemented, means that a single octet is > lost when the receiver handles the last "Urgent" data section. Thus > particularly when multiple urgent data segments are "in flight", it > becomes difficult to guess which octets will be lost by the receiver. > The SeolMa attack effectively uses these lost octets to pad strings used > in TCP based application protocols, thus defeating naïve NIDS pattern > matching. > > There is no discussion in the draft about SeolMa, indeed there isn't > even a mention of it in the Security Considerations. The security considerations does mention the problem of NIDS-evasion, although it only focuses on the semantics of the UP (but does not consider the OOB vs. in-band thing). Would re-writing the SecCons as follows address this point?: ---- cut here ---- Multiple factors can affect the data flow that is actually delivered to an application when the TCP urgent mechanism is employed; namely, the two possible interpretations of the semantics of the Urgent Pointer in current implementations (e.g., depending on the value of the tcp_stdurg sysctl), the possible implementation of the urgent mechanism as an Out-Of-Band (OOB) facility (vs. in-band as intenteded by the IETF specifications), and middle-boxes (such as packet scrubbers) or the end-systems themselves that could cause the "urgent data" to be processed "in band". This might make it difficult for a Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) to track the application-layer data transferred to the destination system, and thus lead to false negatives or false positives in the NIDS [CPNI-TCP] [phrack]. ---- cut here ---- > It's not clear to > me if the recommendation to use SO_OOBINLINE would have an effect here - > my gut feeling is that it would defeat SeolMa by making these "lost" > octets part of the normal data flow again. This wouldn't help for the challenge that NIDS face. This just helps in terms of interoperability: i.e., applications should still work if those "urgent data" are delivered in-band (whether because of setting SO_OOBINLINE or because a packet scrubber cleared the URG bit). > Cisco's solution relies on simply forcing urgent data to be non-urgent, > which will have knock-on effects on TELNET and FTP by default. It's not > clear to me from this document (including reading the references) How about if I replace this sentence of the SecCons: ---- cut here ---- However, this might cause interoperability problems or undesired behavior in the applications running on top of TCP. ---- cut here ---- with this one: ---- cut here ---- However, this might cause interoperability problems or undesired behavior in those applications that rely on the TCP urgent mechanism, such as Telner [telnet] and FTP [ftp] ---- cut here ---- ? > By instituting a blanket ban, in effect, for TCP Urgent data, this > effectively deprecates the entire mechanism. This may prove to be the > only solution, however my general feeling is that this may not be the case. Not that I like it... but in practice, it probably is. As you correctly mentioned before, when multiple segments are in flight, it becomes virtually impossible for a NIDS to be able to do its job. > Niggle: > > The Cisco-PIX reference does not describe the TCP Urgent behaviour > except by implication (it mentions adding rules to allow its use for > TELNET and FTP-PI, but that's it). I have a personal distaste for > product placement in RFCs, and would prefer that this reference pointed > at least at a Cisco paper describing default behaviour, etc. > > As an aside, the Cisco instructions actually show the user how to enable > urgent data on FTP-DTP, rather than FTP-PI, which is incorrect. I leave this one for Andrew to answer ;-) I'd just note that the reason for which Cisco Pix is referenced is probably because it's a widely deployed device that scrubs urgent indications. (i.e., "this thing is widely deployed"). > Specific Recommendations: > > - An informative reference to FTP and TELNET, noting how and why the URG > pointer is used, would make it more obvious what is lost here. Would the re-written text I indicated above do, or do you think we should get into the specifics of what the urgent mechanism is used for in FTP and telnet? > - A more detailed description of SeolMa, and its implications, would be > useful, and I think required in the Security Considerations section. Please let me know if the change indicated above would do. > - I feel that further consideration of the proposed solution to SeolMa > is warranted. You mean what we propose to fix this NIDS evasion technique? Thanks! Kind regards, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9877F3A6869 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:09:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.26 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.26 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 dZ4zKDWiJKbh for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47693A6835 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.2.176] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:10:21 +0100 Message-ID: <4C90FDE3.2020504@isode.com> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:09:55 +0100 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: SM , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165843.07897ca0@elandnews.com> <4C9049DE.7010904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <6.2.5.6.2.20100914232423.05be71b0@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100914232423.05be71b0@elandnews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:09:57 -0000 SM wrote: > Hi Martin, > At 21:21 14-09-10, Martin J. D=FCrst wrote: > >> Sorry for dropping the ball on this one. I should be able to do a=20 >> review this week, sending it off by the 16th. Is that still worth it? > Yes. I think you have time till the end of this month to review it. > According to the tracker, the draft hasn't completed IESG evaluation. Indeed. > It would be good if you could get the review out before the 16th. > >> I have looked at this. It has a very long history. It seems to have=20 >> gone into the IESG both in 2007 and in 2009. I'm sure I won't be able=20 >> to take all this into account. > Martin, you don't need to do such a comprehensive review - doing=20 detailed review is IESG's job. Peter and I only need to check the=20 document for any typical Apps issues. Of course doing a more detailed=20 review would be Ok with us, but this is not a requirement. > There are two existing DISCUSSes for this draft. > >> There also seems to be a problem with the tracker, in that the=20 >> tracker doesn't seem to be able to handle multiple rounds of IESG=20 >> discussion. > It should be able to. What is the problem? > I see the state change for Lisa that was done on January 20, 2010. =20 > Alexey may know more about whether the position logged are up to date. > >> I read "Previous reviews" as "all previous reviews", and expected a=20 >> list. I see there are links to some reviews in the second paragraph.=20 >> That's okay for me, but I'd suggest changing the text of this mail to >> "Some previous reviews". > > Thanks, I'll fix that. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34D4F3A6767 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:49:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.963 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.963 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.283, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 T6SZvA8-tW+k for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:49:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D7BD3A63EB for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:49:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.239.59]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8F6nK2T001626; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:49:25 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284533367; bh=b5ysn2rmsLNh1OHB1cfZfIdYXJ8=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=iSV92IBYjfHFVvNNXDSQmmKmpf9aDBhB92FbySFcluT+CRAV/w4cQ6jvnF697lPWA RY3zl5n0qXUYBRE27zl0vcxky4MKdhM0KIUlpcvShx0VqcPFd7mD/o8ZYEDSHviTwl 9QG454IM1zHmNx1YimooDGHigYlI0NQHGWtJLbGM= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100914232423.05be71b0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:49:10 -0700 To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= From: SM In-Reply-To: <4C9049DE.7010904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165843.07897ca0@elandnews.com> <4C9049DE.7010904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 06:49:06 -0000 Hi Martin, At 21:21 14-09-10, Martin J. D=FCrst wrote: >Sorry for dropping the ball on this one. I=20 >should be able to do a review this week, sending=20 >it off by the 16th. Is that still worth it? According to the tracker, the draft hasn't=20 completed IESG evaluation. It would be good if=20 you could get the review out before the 16th. >I have looked at this. It has a very long=20 >history. It seems to have gone into the IESG=20 >both in 2007 and in 2009. I'm sure I won't be=20 >able to take all this into account. There are two existing DISCUSSes for this draft. >There also seems to be a problem with the=20 >tracker, in that the tracker doesn't seem to be=20 >able to handle multiple rounds of IESG discussion. I see the state change for Lisa that was done on=20 January 20, 2010. Alexey may know more about=20 whether the position logged are up to date. >I read "Previous reviews" as "all previous=20 >reviews", and expected a list. I see there are=20 >links to some reviews in the second paragraph.=20 >That's okay for me, but I'd suggest changing the text of this mail to >"Some previous reviews". Thanks, I'll fix that. Best regards, -sm=20 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C0A3A6AA7 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:21:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.868 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.868 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 ar7PjqReCYUr for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:21:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03333A6A39 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id o8F4LuZw017118 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:21:57 +0900 Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.133]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 064a_2e58_c6d1ad6a_c080_11df_9ac7_001d096c5782; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:21:56 +0900 Received: from [IPv6:::1] ([133.2.210.1]:45761) by itmail.it.aoyama.ac.jp with [XMail 1.22 ESMTP Server] id for from ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:21:57 +0900 Message-ID: <4C9049DE.7010904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 13:21:50 +0900 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: SM References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165843.07897ca0@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165843.07897ca0@elandnews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 04:21:38 -0000 Hello SM, others, On 2010/09/02 9:01, SM wrote: > Hi Martin, > > Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy before September > 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. Sorry for dropping the ball on this one. I should be able to do a review this week, sending it off by the 16th. Is that still worth it? > You can find information > about the author and WG in the datatracker ( > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-policy/ ). I have looked at this. It has a very long history. It seems to have gone into the IESG both in 2007 and in 2009. I'm sure I won't be able to take all this into account. There also seems to be a problem with the tracker, in that the tracker doesn't seem to be able to handle multiple rounds of IESG discussion. > Previous > reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at > http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template I read "Previous reviews" as "all previous reviews", and expected a list. I see there are links to some reviews in the second paragraph. That's okay for me, but I'd suggest changing the text of this mail to "Some previous reviews". Regards, Martin. > The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and > document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email > when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of > draft-ietf-geopriv-policy". > > Thanks, > -sm > > -- #-# Martin J. Dürst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University #-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E7313A69EA for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:48:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.432 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.432 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 wwpda1i6Z+X6 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F3A3A69E2 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:48:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.234.200]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8DEn9cb025961; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 07:49:15 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284389356; bh=xMq62w7K7bpZFiiQbg2KQ31MmWM=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=JhRPBXZohUuAiveo9V/8Yhb0Mh6+eZuw3rxPdYtjavU0fszuYBxLDWQK5N7PH7vHz e6GGwV5A1BmochhO6fbi2QXAvtmaKGH3jlHh8RRr6D9VF0j92OwzcQq3B7RxOvBrN3 r/uQemXrLoi0pd3V0F4GiheopArU+7CeLyny+lv4= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100913032705.05b18628@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 03:29:39 -0700 To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094346.09a51320@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 14:48:56 -0000 Hi Murray, At 23:33 12-09-10, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: >That first URL 404s for me. There's a "/doc" missing after the >".org". Better update your template. :-) Thanks. The correct URL is https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-fecframe-framework/ >(Other reviewers, that's the fix you need to get to the right page.) The format to use is https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-name/ where draft-name is the name of the draft without the version number (-10). Regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A9C3A6925; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.019 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.019 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.279, BAYES_20=-0.74] 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 QGEDmSGytdbz; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 01:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 214EB3A67EC; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 01:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from puncture ((unknown) [217.155.137.60]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:51:12 +0100 X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS Message-Id: <2234.1284367866.672579@puncture> Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:51:06 +0100 From: Dave Cridland To: The IESG , , Apps Area Review List , Security Area Directorate MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; delsp="yes"; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 08:04:40 -0700 Subject: [apps-review] SecDir/Apps Review of draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 08:52:21 -0000 I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's =20 ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the =20 IESG. These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the =20 security area directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat =20 these comments just like any other last call comments. In addition, I have been selected as the Apps Reviewer for this =20 document. These comments are similarly written for the benefit of =20 apps area directors, and document editors and WG chairs should treat =20 these comments just like any other last call comments. I have not made any distinction between the comments. Summary: Whilst I agree with the essential premise - that TCP URG is =20 implemented in a different way to that specified, and should be =20 homogenized in favour of the deployed implementations - I feel that =20 both SeolMa and the proposed solution needs to be expanded upon. Simply dropping TCP Urgent data facilities removes an aspect of TCP =20 which - whilst not commonly used in most modern protocols - is =20 nevertheless still used for useful gain in FTP and TELNET. Specific recommendations are at the bottom. Background: The TCP urgent mechanism, as implemented, means that a single octet =20 is lost when the receiver handles the last "Urgent" data section. =20 Thus particularly when multiple urgent data segments are "in flight", =20 it becomes difficult to guess which octets will be lost by the =20 receiver. The SeolMa attack effectively uses these lost octets to pad =20 strings used in TCP based application protocols, thus defeating na=EFve =20 NIDS pattern matching. There is no discussion in the draft about SeolMa, indeed there isn't =20 even a mention of it in the Security Considerations. It's not clear =20 to me if the recommendation to use SO_OOBINLINE would have an effect =20 here - my gut feeling is that it would defeat SeolMa by making these =20 "lost" octets part of the normal data flow again. Cisco's solution relies on simply forcing urgent data to be =20 non-urgent, which will have knock-on effects on TELNET and FTP by =20 default. It's not clear to me from this document (including reading =20 the references) By instituting a blanket ban, in effect, for TCP Urgent data, this =20 effectively deprecates the entire mechanism. This may prove to be the =20 only solution, however my general feeling is that this may not be the =20 case. Niggle: The Cisco-PIX reference does not describe the TCP Urgent behaviour =20 except by implication (it mentions adding rules to allow its use for =20 TELNET and FTP-PI, but that's it). I have a personal distaste for =20 product placement in RFCs, and would prefer that this reference =20 pointed at least at a Cisco paper describing default behaviour, etc. As an aside, the Cisco instructions actually show the user how to =20 enable urgent data on FTP-DTP, rather than FTP-PI, which is incorrect. Specific Recommendations: - An informative reference to FTP and TELNET, noting how and why the =20 URG pointer is used, would make it more obvious what is lost here. - A more detailed description of SeolMa, and its implications, would =20 be useful, and I think required in the Security Considerations =20 section. - I feel that further consideration of the proposed solution to =20 SeolMa is warranted. Dave. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 580FE3A690C for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:32:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.383 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.383 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.784, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 shLeg2ubsVwe for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:32:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.35]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C573A68CC for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:32:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by malice.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.71]) with mapi; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:33:19 -0700 From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" To: SM Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:33:18 -0700 Thread-Topic: Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 Thread-Index: ActSmz2G/BPPv2p3TNWXbi2RLVomngAch9JA Message-ID: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094346.09a51320@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094346.09a51320@elandnews.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "apps-review@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 06:32:54 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: SM [mailto:sm+ietf@elandsys.com] > Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 9:45 AM > To: Murray S. Kucherawy > Cc: apps-review@ietf.org > Subject: Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 >=20 > Hi Murray, > Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 before > September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can > find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( > https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-ietf-fecframe-framework/ > ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at > http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template That first URL 404s for me. There's a "/doc" missing after the ".org". Be= tter update your template. :-) (Other reviewers, that's the fix you need to get to the right page.) -MSK Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6DAD3A6878 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 10:29:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 wFvwwrt8fwiX for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 10:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47CCA3A68E1 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 10:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGsWCD019699; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:53 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310495; bh=fh56SgTEYsp0WijJru1GcCCw0u0=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=sRY5Y22cxDxy67yj+y1hhUc9QVQKhG2KRYr3kLkQYtgawF+Kg+gD7B5rlZW1aovZm W9DRmNP7hdvRljfXIHorYy/ZPHluTUTQGe7sbdBhT8xObHBm6vjt5QwrWz4NMbHVi+ iO+4xM+cN9nPNXFv0Zb/OAgnChsqeC/3/brXriWA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094546.09540638@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:47:48 -0700 To: Yves Lafon From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 17:29:38 -0000 Hi Yves, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins-01 before September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-spmsi-joins-01". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E3473A68EC for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:55:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.444 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.155, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 XaVMp2nGvr7c for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:55:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AC13A68D7 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:55:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGtqm5019803; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:55:58 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310560; bh=9rNhZ7Yi5uL0MxWG01H6EStbZSk=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=C0D2LU+rCaKGCC07NjUtJZ/DfFeSDhepQHCJ3CObg9o0GPiyiJAWwxC4I2c0Rsngl gNDqMavbVx9k9v56bcZiTcs/S9qRsGUgaQ0Vrr36pn1fNRNGgNO+Kn5/HRhExHesnW IX/p4LVKAGHeCm4qw0N6Mr/H2K2KHkWczqyUERRs= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094803.09a518c0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:55:45 -0700 To: Eliot Lear From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-grow-mrt-13 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:55:36 -0000 Hi Elliot, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-grow-mrt-13 before September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-ietf-grow-mrt-13/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-grow-mrt-13". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770EC3A68F9 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.438 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.438 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.161, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 87m-jpicpsd2 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD293A68E9 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGsWC9019699; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:46 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310488; bh=UA3f5mgIelpY7M3cQfuI1f5m0Mg=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=iKUOUvkAfMhsWSCbT1mZ9Dl4WAaVq/nf1sHqY95IeKVM7H98mj3vDjKi6AYdsjn5O R5bdcc3jdUPRqvBmR7KMh/PYiwy5XMj+VOmaxmiyZrHX9bw2LRBowuGQmWmu1kLW5U eQVAuyypmwZvysRmBuhDGbOaMdEYzAkfjg40357U= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094111.09a50ee8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:42:50 -0700 To: Ted Hardie From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-mavrogiannopoulos-rfc5081bis-06 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:54:32 -0000 Hi Ted, Alexey requested a review of draft-mavrogiannopoulos-rfc5081bis-06 before September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-mavrogiannopoulos-rfc5081bis/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-mavrogiannopoulos-rfc5081bis-06". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055A93A68DF for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.432 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.432 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 wtheQ6lSSRwy for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 997E93A689E for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGsWCB019699; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:50 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310491; bh=65vi2dEDDtTNDyHFDZuVAcZ/nlw=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=SBXL+1pRIdtCPQ4IhKtnNKtbjUNYxy4IV1x0aA1bBXAJwtg6KrpTy7AlU+2ausxek gZYaqv36l5JjgGX+Ui2PDdCrmxLOpOpGveYnOCj6XF1ERNs73Kgdgcb1PTS5NcaLS7 XfFwVK/wHw2Rr+B+Pu/0a1YeqZSSkVGViyKWUmrk= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912094346.09a51320@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:45:01 -0700 To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:54:29 -0000 Hi Murray, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10 before September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-ietf-fecframe-framework/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-fecframe-framework-10". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06E6C3A68F5 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.426 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.426 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.173, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 Aaiv9Kp1ts1V for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A21D3A68E9 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGsWC7019699; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:42 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310484; bh=8WA1/H7sDyb4dkeLK/sSR+WJLy4=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=giV/Y5fd6J6E/s12BS0q5qLOReryDZImuoJU1iOOpELdZD/ahE3tmXmA0aQyjxV0x c9zU7thCE2SsyuwAEhKi6tVw81nSqk+QUuZ5IrRZYki1+FlMvqi+I4cp76Kf+0yhGz pqW3ZlyFhr6+txn5JcCtpBSjQDflfyztUicCJD6g= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912093759.0a7bf0d8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:39:56 -0700 To: Eran Hammer-Lahav From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-lundberg-app-tei-xml-03 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:54:27 -0000 Hi Eran, Alexey requested a review of draft-lundberg-app-tei-xml-03 before September 30, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-lundberg-app-tei-xml/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-lundberg-app-tei-xml-03". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A6203A68B6 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.171 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.171 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.172, BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 8S5b8-t0AFFa for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F383A68D4 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.232.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8CGsWC5019699; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:54:38 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1284310480; bh=ST6yneWs5WICOXvsbp4AHBxzYxc=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=RW2dR0qQ4emRI3eF4WFdiF/QzBslwuG4nXNHHP5FtdUYDtKE2I5pj0gMO27Obt2mX eFPcV8xzixLzWcMQ7vHhq+l9yOj8cMtWkp/z4/Ofwxwwz1z2ziL/1zBGFl/FPFGLiN ZtcGh2ozJswIDA9XaBQENLmBpm5pSGVkcWRNg4Ls= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100912093306.0b225c18@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 09:35:06 -0700 To: Joe Hildebrand From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-netmod-arch-08 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 16:54:20 -0000 Hi Joe, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch-08 before September 23, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/draft-ietf-netmod-arch/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch-08". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 725C93A694D for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:28:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 FiJm1qiA8QFq for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C4603A691D for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:28:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (196-210-202-197.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.202.197]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o86ISh5Z027974; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:28:49 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283797732; bh=El0Dfch4c44PYSQ4WZoE6HYhaxE=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=rJEyz8pKpuRoGC2l+F+tLP6yUd6IUt1YtCL5mbviEnh/p7vDg6JMb3bAQG3qeW8si weo9CgBCf1MOpIaiejdszF+3qKUQeXEK6z8MrCHyVVoqbKIATj1AGDKkqupYdkWHgB 7V6+1Mmhft0214fTXo/gJzDAwo9tSiT5cqvG5tw0= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100906112124.04d1afa0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 11:23:49 -0700 To: Claudio Allocchio From: SM In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 18:28:34 -0000 Hi Claudio, At 07:53 AM 9/6/2010, Claudio Allocchio wrote: >.... ops... I posted the review... but I just discovered that for >some (unknown) reasons I was unsubscribed from apps-discuss@ietf.org >meanhile... > >:-( > >Ok, I hope the moderator will releae the mail ASAP, while I >re-subscribe to the list. Thanks for reviewing draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options-04. Your message to apps-discuss has already been approved ( http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01724.html ). Best regards, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC5CA3A67B5 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 07:53:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.881 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.881 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245] 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 jA6LikV1wwQV for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 07:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyrus.dir.garr.it (cyrus.dir.garr.it [IPv6:2001:760:0:158::29]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E2DA3A67B3 for ; Mon, 6 Sep 2010 07:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mac-allocchio3.elettra.trieste.it (mac-allocchio3.elettra.trieste.it [140.105.2.18]) by cyrus.dir.garr.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o86ErtCX057584 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 6 Sep 2010 16:53:55 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 16:53:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Claudio Allocchio X-X-Sender: claudio@mac-allocchio3.elettra.trieste.it To: Alexey Melnikov In-Reply-To: <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> Message-ID: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org, Claudio Allocchio Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:53:43 -0000 .... ops... I posted the review... but I just discovered that for some (unknown) reasons I was unsubscribed from apps-discuss@ietf.org meanhile... :-( Ok, I hope the moderator will releae the mail ASAP, while I re-subscribe to the list. all the best! Claudio -------- >From apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 6 16:41:02 2010 Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 07:40:28 -0700 From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org To: claudio.allocchio@garr.it Subject: Your message to apps-discuss awaits moderator approval Your mail to 'apps-discuss' with the subject apps-team review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. The reason it is being held: Post by non-member to a members-only list Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel this posting, please visit the following URL: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/confirm/apps-discuss/a21d2539060a65e46efb897d8497ba538040d350 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claudio Allocchio G A R R Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it Senior Technical Officer tel: +39 040 3758523 Italian Academic and G=Claudio; S=Allocchio; fax: +39 040 3758565 Research Network P=garr; A=garr; C=it; PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7890D3A6A5D for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 03:02:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.338 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.338 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.261, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 G+Ncjr36QZcU for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 03:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 135A63A6A1B for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 03:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.2.191] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:02:28 +0100 Message-ID: <4C7F7625.8040003@isode.com> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 11:02:13 +0100 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Claudio Allocchio References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:02:01 -0000 Claudio Allocchio wrote: > I though you wanted a full revision of the DHCP-related options, hence > my objection. ;-) No, this is the job of IESG. Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1393A6A84 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:34:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245] 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 0LDmsh4oZQks for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:34:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyrus.dir.garr.it (cyrus.dir.garr.it [IPv6:2001:760:0:158::29]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C4B83A67CF for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:34:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vpnclnt02.dir.garr.it (vpnclnt02.dir.garr.it [193.206.159.218]) by cyrus.dir.garr.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o829YfOa087484 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:34:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:34:41 +0200 (CEST) From: Claudio Allocchio X-X-Sender: claudio@mac-allocchio3.local To: Alexey Melnikov In-Reply-To: <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> Message-ID: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org, Claudio Allocchio Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:34:25 -0000 On Thu, 2 Sep 2010, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > Claudio Allocchio wrote: > >> Hello, > > Hi Claudio, > >> On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, SM wrote: >> >>> Hi Claudio, >>> >>> Alexey requested a review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options before >>> September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find >>> information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options/ ). >>> Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at >>> http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template >> >> I had a quick look to the draft, and I'm not sure I can fully review a >> number of the technical details in the specification. My expertise in >> "mobility" is much more related to "mail and messaging" protocols in mobile >> devices, while this seems much more close to network layer options. > > If you can just have a quick scan of the document to see if there are any > Apps issues: use of XML, date/time, URIs, Internationalization, IDNA, etc, > that would be greatly appreciated. No need to be an expert in mobility. OK, this I can do for sure! I though you wanted a full revision of the DHCP-related options, hence my objection. ;-) > >> Are you sure we do not have a more expert reviwer in the pool? If not, I >> can do it. >> >> Let me know! >> >>> The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and >>> document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email >>> when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of >>> draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options". >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -sm >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claudio Allocchio G A R R Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it Senior Technical Officer tel: +39 040 3758523 Italian Academic and G=Claudio; S=Allocchio; fax: +39 040 3758565 Research Network P=garr; A=garr; C=it; PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 227953A6A8E for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:27:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.334 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.334 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.265, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 fgYYLlwoZ7KK for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 156263A67A7 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 02:27:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.16.2.191] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:27:34 +0100 Message-ID: <4C7F6DF9.6040803@isode.com> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:27:22 +0100 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Claudio Allocchio References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 09:27:06 -0000 Claudio Allocchio wrote: > Hello, Hi Claudio, > On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, SM wrote: > >> Hi Claudio, >> >> Alexey requested a review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options >> before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You >> can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options/ >> ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at >> http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template > > I had a quick look to the draft, and I'm not sure I can fully review a > number of the technical details in the specification. My expertise in > "mobility" is much more related to "mail and messaging" protocols in > mobile devices, while this seems much more close to network layer options. If you can just have a quick scan of the document to see if there are any Apps issues: use of XML, date/time, URIs, Internationalization, IDNA, etc, that would be greatly appreciated. No need to be an expert in mobility. > Are you sure we do not have a more expert reviwer in the pool? If not, > I can do it. > > Let me know! > >> The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and >> document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the >> email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of >> draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options". >> >> Thanks, >> -sm > Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D49513A689F for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 01:34:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245] 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 BwD3w8wCdRP4 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 01:34:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cyrus.dir.garr.it (cyrus.dir.garr.it [IPv6:2001:760:0:158::29]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3224F3A684B for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2010 01:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vpnclnt02.dir.garr.it (vpnclnt02.dir.garr.it [193.206.159.218]) by cyrus.dir.garr.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o828YM2t085519 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:34:24 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:34:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Claudio Allocchio X-X-Sender: claudio@mac-allocchio3.local To: SM In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> Message-ID: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Claudio Allocchio , apps-review@ietf.org Subject: Re: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 08:34:06 -0000 Hello, On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, SM wrote: > Hi Claudio, > > Alexey requested a review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options before > September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find > information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options/ ). > Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at > http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template I had a quick look to the draft, and I'm not sure I can fully review a number of the technical details in the specification. My expertise in "mobility" is much more related to "mail and messaging" protocols in mobile devices, while this seems much more close to network layer options. Are you sure we do not have a more expert reviwer in the pool? If not, I can do it. Let me know! > The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document > shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when > submitting the review should be "apps-team review of > draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options". > > Thanks, > -sm > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claudio Allocchio G A R R Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it Senior Technical Officer tel: +39 040 3758523 Italian Academic and G=Claudio; S=Allocchio; fax: +39 040 3758565 Research Network P=garr; A=garr; C=it; PGP Key: http://www.cert.garr.it/PGP/keys.php3#ca Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5603A6A0F for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:44:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.056 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.056 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.543, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 YpnvocMeswur for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:44:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F6A3A684D for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:44:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82043fj026811; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:04:26 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283385868; bh=uTFzzBGLdIGIeMv4nkLklLKK6Ow=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=OqwF6pP1VJCVCSGP9w/eGIEMzIagwp67L88N9saXGaDVUUORxbsD26tSeUxwnoKTz xhvdLBD7S2N2dlyYP9llc4MTqdyAuXf8Ul0S/G07btlfndtys4AnFeN3E706PqG694 CFjj508FhWfLFqmpTMOUHn2mvO6/ZIpKVcziPb6k= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901170157.07897f30@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:03:41 -0700 To: Carsten Bormann From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-netmod-arch X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:44:32 -0000 Hi Carsten, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-arch/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-netmod-arch". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9F73A6A0F; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:40:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.966 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.966 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.633, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 sm0LyF5Zhhws; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D64C63A6814; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:40:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o820edmG029199; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:40:45 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283388047; bh=Ey9LtIf8+kmCQGhukjT0Gj5WkYg=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=V+0vNVwZotbVlcMuyDc4nhsd/G/9XfztsAKO/qo/mviT6RSvv9YosH19uSzeQyuEQ oGyQchTUgYlGtgJf5/7K7pNgQ2eG8/IE0B4PKtpqHz/90Dd58yMh5vIeQXHaaPrU7C ZImvbx46kWBdbwwgld6gk38jgYJr7SpRHbNpveiE= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901173558.07897f30@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:40:16 -0700 To: apps-discuss@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Apps Area Review Team Report for August 2010 X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:40:20 -0000 Hello, The Applications Area Review Team provides semi-formal reviews of Internet-Drafts as a way to improve the quality of IETF specifications. The members of the team are selected from the IETF community, especially from among active participants and recognized experts in the Applications Area. The following reviews have been performed in August 2010: draft-gennai-smime-cnipa-pec-08 was reviewed by Dave Crocker. Pending reviews: draft-ietf-netmod-dsdl-map-05 assigned to Aaron Stone draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-sync-08 assigned to Aaron Stone Regards, S. Moonesamy On behalf of the Apps Review Team http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/applications-area-review-team Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A16F3A6A13 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.123 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.123 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.476, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 zwipLPvpT6NX for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7DA3A6A0F for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82043ff026811; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:04:19 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283385861; bh=fjTUbke0b4wFmBNqjzxfhcFbIQI=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=mGsam2ktdu/t4CR7REHocYEP6k6NuNkGrdqF9jjfUh/0+YcOSzHMAthbYVzWWNpbh WyAfWS3rdvbQ+rk3b6MBFqtP9GxrL4MPsLRAElJPUs2StjrTsh+CqzJKmbbsZDLJ96 qib7NxzccmkkwGPlLD28IXG/2c+BrDioXinI3JUY= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165456.07897b58@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:57:29 -0700 To: Vijay Gurbani From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-geopriv-arch X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:03:55 -0000 Hi Vijay, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-geopriv-arch before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-arch/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-geopriv-arch". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302513A6A0F for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.427, BAYES_05=-1.11, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 sIJ5AFZwjq8p for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94F5F3A6A07 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82043fd026811; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:04:16 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283385858; bh=IO/wbN47aXn4Y82JwyCOPldMnUw=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=ug2pNQt96Vw+YMSsjWkcwnOyqI3/VORWnj//SFqMCvoQQ+H9O2ePKu/3QCkXCpp3U cbEB+DdUQhxD6B6xU7GMyXOre1GLKKlr88Dq7gJhVvs4ejkIKcDojGFlFRShCJ6cXh bNlnqBdubHvD6MdC+uuQZ5PjII02aEsTTyBvt/iU= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164927.078978c8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:52:52 -0700 To: Dave Cridland From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-fecframe-sdp-elements X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:03:55 -0000 Hi Dave, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-fecframe-sdp-elements before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-fecframe-sdp-elements/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-fecframe-sdp-elements". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4065B3A6A07 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.968 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.968 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.783, BAYES_40=-0.185, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 7wUE-QJsaG9h for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94EC53A6852 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82043fb026811; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:04:12 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283385854; bh=m/lN+JJ62DOq3TCKyH4eySWnuoo=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=q5H+KhXCpFLI2brXMvzjdbDBVTIwCIromLkIuKthlDbs7Gz/bGCyGKmNm5mjt6BGc QI7CQTtnXyr3rdDOv17hW2Zqd2yfrwxCEZVk1YCKyTudwCJszHVEdKBKa5m+BRSsKK TSfAPWPDlmoEaCTcgCo4S/Y78stphabyhFYo/86Y= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901164616.07897638@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:49:25 -0700 To: Claudio Allocchio From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:03:55 -0000 Hi Claudio, Alexey requested a review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-das-mipshop-andsf-dhcp-options". Thanks, -sm Return-Path: X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C27DD3A6852 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.124 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.314, BAYES_05=-1.11, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 dqXWStNVymd6 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C903A6A10 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:03:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-PC.elandsys.com (miranda.controlfreak.co.za [196.36.80.182]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o82043fh026811; Wed, 1 Sep 2010 17:04:23 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1283385865; bh=QRtTt4kVHYk6jbNHKrErX3j4qWU=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=Hutj0Dq24d0HhzBxjF43tn/wQwW6u+GEY0sVzXU9QRJAWDU7jIwNPYPnj85el7T0H dJPuwR1ggCDpZkwTA63F/ELykr7kyRSi3AJVPix9EGfW97S2m+6OQ/EKu5NiItJcZc pMGVUWTqB8lKWzW3O0OywnGfeX06ppdms3X6MNUc= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20100901165843.07897ca0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:01:55 -0700 To: Martin =?iso-8859-1?Q?D=FCrst?= From: SM Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Cc: apps-review@ietf.org Subject: [apps-review] Request for review: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Apps Area Review List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:03:55 -0000 Hi Martin, Alexey requested a review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy before September 9, 2010. The request is being assigned to you. You can find information about the author and WG in the datatracker ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-geopriv-policy/ ). Previous reviews from the Apps-review Team are accessible at http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template The review should be sent to apps-discuss, the author, WG Chair and document shepherd, if applicable, and the IESG. The subject of the email when submitting the review should be "apps-team review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy". Thanks, -sm