I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-duerst-archived-at-07.txt Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani Review Date: 7 Aug 2007 IESG Telechat date: 9 Aug 2007 Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard. Couple nits follows. This is a well-written short draft that proposes a new email header field called Archived-At. This header is used to refer to a particular message at an archived location. Nit 1) The opening sentence of S3.2 does not contribute much more than the section title itself does. As such, it can be removed safely. Nit 2) S4 contains three security implications. Adequate defenses are provided for the second and third security attacks, but not the first one (mentioned in the first paragraph.) Are there any defenses against the first attack? If so, please consider stating them succintly as you have done for the others, even if it means simply pointing the reader to STD66. If not, then just saying so provides enough of a documentiary evidence that an attack of this sort is feasible (compared to being caught flat-footed, it is often better to be aware that an attack exists even if no defenses are known.) Thanks, - vijay -- Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent 2701 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9F-546, Lisle, Illinois 60532 (USA) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED],bell-labs.com,acm.org} WWW: http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/bell-labs _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
