Subject: [mile] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:42:07 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Managed Incident Lightweight Exchange Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID)
	Author(s)       : Kathleen M. Moriarty
	Filename        : draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt
	Pages           : 73
	Date            : 2011-12-15

   Security incidents, such as system compromises, worms, viruses,
   phishing incidents, and denial of service, typically result in the
   loss of service, data, and resources both human and system.  Service
   providers and Computer Security Incident Response Teams need to be
   equipped and ready to assist in communicating and tracing security
   incidents with tools and procedures in place before the occurrence of
   an attack.  Real-time Inter-network Defense (RID) outlines a
   proactive inter-network communication method to facilitate sharing
   incident handling data while integrating existing detection, tracing,
   source identification, and mitigation mechanisms for a complete
   incident handling solution.  Combining these capabilities in a
   communication system provides a way to achieve higher security levels
   on networks.  Policy guidelines for handling incidents are
   recommended and can be agreed upon by a consortium using the security
   recommendations and considerations.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:47:47 -0500

Hello,

The updated version includes many of the recommended changes, the following are still pending:

The schema and examples MAY need to be updated depending on the final decision as to whether or not RID should envelope IODEF (looking like that will be the answer, unless there is a reason to keep as is).

The examples need to be updated to use something other than SHA-1 for the digital signatures.

The Normative and Informative section includes 2 options for text.  I was not 100% sure what this will wind up as, so both are included for comparison & discussion.

Thank you,
Kathleen (as editor)

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 7:42 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [mile] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt

_______________________________________________
mile mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mile

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:09:21 -0500

Hello,

Please post any views on the outstanding question for enveloping IODEF in RID.  It seems like the right direction, but it would be good to hear some comments on the list.

Thank you & happy holidays!
Kathleen (as editor)

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 7:48 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [mile] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mile-rfc6045-bis-04.txt

Hello,

Thank you,
Kathleen (as editor)

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 17:14:48 -0500

On the normative/informative section I much prefer the 1st option.  If 
you're going to leave both in then you should probably add a note that 
only one is going to be retained.

Also curious what others think about the enveloping issue.

spt

On 12/22/11 3:09 PM, [email-masked] wrote:
> Thank you&  happy holidays!
> Kathleen (as editor)
>
> The Normative and Informative section includes 2 options for text.  I was not 100% sure what this will wind up as, so both are included for comparison&  discussion.
>
> Thank you,
> Kathleen (as editor)
>