On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 Oct 2017, at 4:16, tjw ietf wrote: > >> This starts a Working Group Last Call for: >> draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5011-security-considerations > > > I support the publication of > draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc5011-security-considerations either as-is or with an > additional section on looking at timing from a second perspective (as > detailed by Mike StJohns).
Thank you, Paul. Dear WG - I know that this document has a limited audience, is kind of an annoying read, and is filled with maths (gasp!). Wes and I do believe that this is an important document - getting these timers wrong potentially has really bad security implications; there was intended to be a companion document to RFC5011, but seeing as that wasn't created, I think it is really importantt that we address this. So, pretty please, review this document and send feedback. We've tried hard to make it readable, but the topic is unfortunately complex and can only be simplified so far - it is also really hard to talk about sliding windows of time. So, again, please review and comment, W > > --Paul Hoffman > > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
