Telechat Review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-
review-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-genart-telechat-krishnan-2011-11-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2011-12-13
Requested 2011-11-17
Authors Richard Barnes, Martin Thomson, James Winterbottom, Hannes Tschofenig
Draft last updated 2011-11-30
Completed reviews Genart Telechat review of -?? by Suresh Krishnan
Genart Last Call review of -?? by David Black
Genart Last Call review of -?? by David Black
Genart Last Call review of -?? by David Black
Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Scott Kelly
Assignment Reviewer Suresh Krishnan
State Completed
Review review-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-genart-telechat-krishnan-2011-11-30
Review completed: 2011-11-30

Review
review-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-genart-telechat-krishnan-2011-11-30

The changes requested in the Gen-ART review of the -03 version have been made in the
-04 version of this draft.

Thanks,
--David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Black, David
> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 5:51 PM
> To: rbarnes at bbn.com; martin.thomson at andrew.com; james.winterbottom at andrew.com;
> Hannes.Tschofenig at gmx.net; gen-art at ietf.org
> Cc: Black, David; Robert Sparks; geopriv at ietf.org
> Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-03
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART,
> please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
> or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-geopriv-policy-uri-03
> Reviewer: David L. Black
> Review Date: November 22, 2011
> IESG Telechat date: December 1, 2011
> 
> Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
> should be fixed before publication.
> 
> This draft specifies policy URIs for management of privacy policy for location
> information obtained and maintained by Location Configuration Protocols (LCPs).
> The draft is clear and well written.
> 
> All of the topics raised by the GenART review of the -02 version are addressed
> in the -03 version, except that an unfortunate sentence structure has neutered
> one of the agreed-to resolutions (PUT and DELETE requests SHOULD always be
> rejected for http: URIs).
> 
> The following changes should be made to correctly capture the intent (this is
> a normative change):
> 
> Section 7.1:
> OLD
>    If other means of protection are available, an "http:" URI MAY be used.
> NEW
>    If other means of protection are available, an "http:" URI MAY be used,
>    but location servers SHOULD reject all PUT and DELETE requests for policy
>    URIs that use the "http:" URI scheme.
> END
> 
> Section 7.2:
> OLD
>       When neither application-layer or network-
>       layer security is provided, location servers MUST reject requests
>       using the PUT and DELETE methods, and SHOULD reject PUT and DELETE
>       requests for policy URIs that use the "http:" URI scheme.
> NEW
>       When neither application-layer or network-
>       layer security is provided, location servers MUST reject requests
>       using the PUT and DELETE methods.
> END
> 
> idnits 2.12.12 did not find anything that needs attention.
> 
> Thanks,
> --David
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> david.black at emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------