[apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-source-quench-04

Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org> Mon, 06 February 2012 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7609C21F8636 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 06:29:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -96.777
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.777 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PUUhOjL0ZvT6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 06:29:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lvps83-169-7-107.dedicated.hosteurope.de (www.gondrom.org [83.169.7.107]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0707721F8630 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2012 06:29:16 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=gondrom.org; b=QD2AMH2A/I3HP7LSiTqOrJPqt9FyYn37l0g4SFbr6qhDrRCzPiKNwgx5avRflUcbsJzOJJ9d1HeQEEZdbPUzRcbrzmR4/kZO717FUdm8XNEkkk4e1f+VlweKmJFh1/Fr; h=Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:Content-Type;
Received: (qmail 18014 invoked from network); 6 Feb 2012 15:29:12 +0100
Received: from 94-194-102-93.zone8.bethere.co.uk (HELO ?192.168.1.68?) (94.194.102.93) by www.gondrom.org with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 6 Feb 2012 15:29:12 +0100
Message-ID: <4F2FE3B8.4080808@gondrom.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:29:12 +0000
From: Tobias Gondrom <tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111229 Thunderbird/9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tsvwg-source-quench.all@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060801090407020307050202"
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
Subject: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-source-quench-04
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 14:29:21 -0000

Hello,

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for 
this draft (for background on appsdir, please see 
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate).

Please consider these comments along with any other Last Call comments 
you may receive.

Document:  draft-ietf-tsvwg-source-quench-04
Title:  Deprecation of ICMP Source Quench messages
Reviewer: Tobias Gondrom
Review Date: 2012-02-06
Abstract: This document formally deprecates the use of ICMP Source Quench
    messages by transport protocols, formally updating RFC 792, RFC 1122,
    and RFC 1812.  Additionally, it requests that the status of RFC 1016
    be changed to "Historic".


Summary:

This draft is ready for publication as an RFC.
And I agree with the conclusions of the Transport Area Working Group 
(tsvwg) to deprecate ICMP source quench, especially from a potential 
security perspective.

Comment/remark:
one of the reasons for deprecating ICMP source quench was given in the 
draft in section 1 as:
"- Virtually all popular host implementations have removed support
       for ICMP Source Quench messages since (at least) 2005 [RFC5927]"
Please note, that the reviewer did not test/verify this statement, but 
assumes that the transport working group has researched and confirmed 
this data in WGLC. If this is not the case, the transport are WG should 
reconfirm this assumption before the draft progresses to IESG.

Best regards, Tobias



Tobias Gondrom
email: tobias.gondrom@gondrom.org
mobile: +447521003005