Subject: [T2TRG] draft-irtf-t2trg-iot-seccons-07

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:40:55 +0200

Hi all,

as I volunteered to help shepherd the draft I want to do a good job in
reviewing the work.

It would be good for the authors (and the group) to clearly articulate
what the main purpose of the draft is. Ari mentioned that the purpose
was to write a "document that would allow people writing security
considerations for (IETF) IoT drafts". This is not what the document
currently says.

Either Ari is wrong about the intended purpose or the text needs to be
corrected.

Before I provide detailed review comments I prefer to know what it aims
to accomplish.

Ciao
Hannes

---

From: Ari Keränen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:19:13 +0000

Hi,

For context on this discussion, as I said in the other thread:

> This draft started as a "IoT security considerations" document that would allow people writing security considerations for (IETF) IoT drafts to point to more detailed discussion on what are the threats and potential remedies in the envisioned IoT systems. And it still serves that purpose.
> 
> In addition the draft summarises the existing work in this space. Hence is turned out to be (also) "SotA and Challenges" draft.

And that's how I read the current text. But yes, let's make sure we are aligned here and the intention is clear for everyone.

Cheers,
Ari

> On 10 Oct 2017, at 12.40, Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> _______________________________________________
> T2TRG mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/t2trg

---

From: Mohit Sethi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:58:39 +0300

Hi Hannes,

Thanks for volunteering to shepherd the document. I think your feedback 
will definitely help the us (the authors) to improve the document quality.

I think Ari has very succinctly pointed out the motivation for this 
draft. Of course, if you think that there is some text that would better 
highlight the motivation, we are happy to add/modify.

Please also bear in mind that this is a informational research group 
document so it talks about several security challenges, protocols, tools 
and building blocks.

--Mohit

---

From: Ari Keränen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:26:29 +0000

Hi,

I had a fresh look at the draft thinking how we could address the issue of being more clear on the intent(s) of the document. Perhaps we could add to the abstract and/or intro something along the lines of:

"This document can be used by IoT standards specifications as a reference for details about security considerations applying to the specified system or protocol."

Cheers,
Ari

> On 11 Oct 2017, at 17.58, Mohit Sethi M <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Hannes,
> 
> Thanks for volunteering to shepherd the document. I think your feedback will definitely help the us (the authors) to improve the document quality.
> 
> I think Ari has very succinctly pointed out the motivation for this draft. Of course, if you think that there is some text that would better highlight the motivation, we are happy to add/modify.
> 
> Please also bear in mind that this is a informational research group document so it talks about several security challenges, protocols, tools and building blocks.
> 
> --Mohit

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:30:48 +0200

Sounds good. I would keep it focused on protocols.

---

From: Mohit Sethi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 15:52:40 +0300

Dear Hannes and Ari,

Thanks for the suggestion. We will add this text to the abstract and the 
introduction.

@Hannes: Should we go ahead and submit another version with the new text 
or should we first wait for a more thorough review from you?

--Mohit

---

From: Hannes Tschofenig <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:16:22 +0200

Hi Mohit,

given the feedback from the discussions in the IoT directorate I am not
sure what review is expected from me.

So, go ahead with the draft submission.

Ciao
Hannes

On 10/26/2017 02:52 PM, Mohit Sethi wrote:
>>> I had a fresh look at the draft thinking how we could address the
>>> issue of being more clear on the intent(s) of the document. Perhaps
>>> we could add to the abstract and/or intro something along the lines of:
>>>
>>> "This document can be used by IoT standards specifications as a
>>> reference for details about security considerations applying to the
>>> specified system or protocol."
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ari
>>>
>>>> Thanks for volunteering to shepherd the document. I think your
>>>> feedback will definitely help the us (the authors) to improve the
>>>> document quality.
>>>>
>>>> draft. Of course, if you think that there is some text that would
>>>> better highlight the motivation, we are happy to add/modify.
>>>>
>>>> document so it talks about several security challenges, protocols,
>>>> tools and building blocks.
>>>>
>>>> --Mohit
>>>>>> This draft started as a "IoT security considerations" document
>>>>>> that would allow people writing security considerations for (IETF)
>>>>>> IoT drafts to point to more detailed discussion on what are the
>>>>>> threats and potential remedies in the envisioned IoT systems. And
>>>>>> it still serves that purpose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In addition the draft summarises the existing work in this space.
>>>>>> Hence is turned out to be (also) "SotA and Challenges" draft.
>>>>> And that's how I read the current text. But yes, let's make sure we
>>>>> are aligned here and the intention is clear for everyone.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ari
>>>>>