From nobody Mon Jan 4 10:51:13 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373DD1A1A6B for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:51:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.003 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rN_hlJYxubrz for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:51:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0129.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.129]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A0C1A1A47 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:51:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from DM2PR09MB0365.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.160.247.18) by DM2PR09MB0367.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.160.247.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 18:51:07 +0000 Received: from DM2PR09MB0365.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.247.18]) by DM2PR09MB0365.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.247.18]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 18:51:07 +0000 From: "Waltermire, David A." To: "Adam W. Montville" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax) Thread-Index: AQHRQ0ubDfYYcNl/WkO4QsD2s6JY3J7rumBQ Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 18:51:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <565F0BE9.6020908@gmail.com> <568450C5.8030709@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <568450C5.8030709@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=david.waltermire@nist.gov; x-originating-ip: [129.6.224.126] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR09MB0367; 5:jAwmfkojdl4gyh+sB5hEfZ95N44jtIE12wXQczY8PmfT/z+8GuVd8g3lrReTOgdUs6JhizopzYTPUZG8Fp/aOwMXnJOXwwoGqMAk74+kFpTyWSD9If5K1IJFWpTvuO1dNSWInj7MSHJN+YHm8lhsqA==; 24:22byRoEx+TZAyYJxWRRu8JpnnWjdPKGxLnxl5LL4A+Wnvgzyz5zPb8x2VSmWnW3b19gDXJgRHzIxf17A3lYUdA4KBdoBcVt2AInICdu0f5E= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR09MB0367; x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(520078)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR09MB0367; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0367; x-forefront-prvs: 08118EFC2B x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(164054003)(24454002)(13464003)(479174004)(199003)(71364002)(24434003)(77096005)(10400500002)(107886002)(5001960100002)(5001770100001)(1096002)(92566002)(74316001)(2900100001)(15975445007)(33656002)(76576001)(4001150100001)(2501003)(19580395003)(106116001)(97736004)(3846002)(19580405001)(102836003)(586003)(6116002)(81156007)(5003600100002)(5004730100002)(66066001)(106356001)(5002640100001)(40100003)(11100500001)(87936001)(86362001)(122556002)(99286002)(1220700001)(105586002)(54356999)(76176999)(189998001)(50986999)(5008740100001)(2950100001)(101416001)(19627235001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR09MB0367; H:DM2PR09MB0365.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nist.gov does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: nist.gov X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Jan 2016 18:51:07.3297 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 2ab5d82f-d8fa-4797-a93e-054655c61dec X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR09MB0367 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:51:12 -0000 +1 for option 2. -1 for option 4. I don't believe an ERD (or any other visual form) will be = sufficient to document the IM. It can be provided as a value add, but some = text documentation will be needed using one of the other options. I'd say t= he same for UML if it is purely used in a visually rendered form. Thanks, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam W. > Montville > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 4:47 PM > To: sacm@ietf.org > Subject: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus > Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax) >=20 > Hi again. After going through the multiple threads on this topic, it's n= ot really > clear which approach people would like to take. This is in part because = some > people changed their preference between the two threads. >=20 > For the record, here's what I was able to count (I think): >=20 > Option 1: 3 (one person also voted for Option 3) Option 2: 1 (a first > preference for one person) Option 3: 3 (one person also voted for Option = 1) > Option 4: 0 Option 5: 5 (one of which is an individual's second preferenc= e; > another of which would switch from Option 3) >=20 > I've heard, privately, some strong arguments against using English. > I've heard rather reasonable arguments in favor of it. >=20 > Given the confusion along the way, let's restart this consensus call base= d on > the options as originally indicated (see message below). Let's leave it o= pen > until midnight (UTC) January 7. We need to arrive at some conclusion ver= y > soon, so that we can start making tangible progress on expressing the IM. >=20 > Kind regards, >=20 > Adam >=20 >=20 > On 12/02/2015 09:19 AM, Adam W. Montville wrote: > > Hi. > > > > This message starts a two-week consensus call for selecting an > > expression syntax for our Information Model. Danny has already > > started a thread on the subject [1]. There are five options in total: > > > > Option 1: RFC 7326 - Energy Management Framework [2] > > > > Option 2: Information Model for Large-Scale Measurement Platforms [3] > > > > Option 3: Unified Modeling Language [4] > > > > Option 4: Entity-relationship Diagram [5] > > > > Option 5: Plain English, as exemplified by RFC 6880 [6] > > > > > > Please let us know your preference, if you have not already, no later > > than 23:59 UTC on 2015-12-16. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=3Dsacm&gbt=3D1&ind= ex=3D > > UGE7tF3SO-e3Bo1AkwVHVvtvu3s > > > > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7326/ > > > > [3] > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burbridge-lmap-information-mode > > l/ > > > > [4] http://www.uml-diagrams.org/ > > > > [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity%E2%80%93relationship_model > > > > [6] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6880 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Mon Jan 4 11:51:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 962E61A90DD for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:51:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ADiMGQeSlhoN for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com (mail-io0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DFB31A90DA for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:51:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id 1so119080601ion.1 for ; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:51:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=fy577LVmwESFZkfOd0UGU/v2kMh1uN9b9gsZkd5uY5M=; b=0F/Ia1LnivI1fyCCylSP+Np6Rh396bqgaxClPgNZH/mTdVez55m2UUNSls3XOzB6Oz XFNgLes5n0eqLUdI1uh7RsBII2lbPFqypLWA2y+R7P/A/cLY03zgr8SgxaAOV6rAhan2 Mg5K7L0AvksylTv7fPYStLtQ5jnEVVY4I9+est67Y/Y9Pz/masJcgVSWR2M8y53a2plA oamNCPmVtUYH5OOiOJl+x/Bgad2JjoApYBQjG0f/SRSNftC1Ejjla7kMu8bp2wdArQkD zWJD3pw0aMZJc5vLuX1JEgZ4PJKYgZ2IfGDA45Xn6mGWCUMN8gFXr54nqG0SYA7C/TQs tpMQ== X-Received: by 10.107.136.208 with SMTP id s77mr78175526ioi.142.1451937106502; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:51:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.170.74 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:51:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <565F0BE9.6020908@gmail.com> <568450C5.8030709@gmail.com> From: Ira McDonald Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:51:27 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Waltermire, David A." , Ira McDonald Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ea6ee78292305288773a8 Archived-At: Cc: "Adam W. Montville" , "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:51:49 -0000 --001a113ea6ee78292305288773a8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, I agree with Dave Waltermire: +1 for Option 2 -1 for Option 4 or Option 5 Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Waltermire, David A. < david.waltermire@nist.gov> wrote: > +1 for option 2. > > -1 for option 4. I don't believe an ERD (or any other visual form) will be > sufficient to document the IM. It can be provided as a value add, but some > text documentation will be needed using one of the other options. I'd say > the same for UML if it is purely used in a visually rendered form. > > Thanks, > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam W. > > Montville > > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 4:47 PM > > To: sacm@ietf.org > > Subject: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus > > Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax) > > > > Hi again. After going through the multiple threads on this topic, it's > not really > > clear which approach people would like to take. This is in part because > some > > people changed their preference between the two threads. > > > > For the record, here's what I was able to count (I think): > > > > Option 1: 3 (one person also voted for Option 3) Option 2: 1 (a first > > preference for one person) Option 3: 3 (one person also voted for Option > 1) > > Option 4: 0 Option 5: 5 (one of which is an individual's second > preference; > > another of which would switch from Option 3) > > > > I've heard, privately, some strong arguments against using English. > > I've heard rather reasonable arguments in favor of it. > > > > Given the confusion along the way, let's restart this consensus call > based on > > the options as originally indicated (see message below). Let's leave it > open > > until midnight (UTC) January 7. We need to arrive at some conclusion > very > > soon, so that we can start making tangible progress on expressing the IM. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Adam > > > > > > On 12/02/2015 09:19 AM, Adam W. Montville wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > > > This message starts a two-week consensus call for selecting an > > > expression syntax for our Information Model. Danny has already > > > started a thread on the subject [1]. There are five options in total: > > > > > > Option 1: RFC 7326 - Energy Management Framework [2] > > > > > > Option 2: Information Model for Large-Scale Measurement Platforms [3] > > > > > > Option 3: Unified Modeling Language [4] > > > > > > Option 4: Entity-relationship Diagram [5] > > > > > > Option 5: Plain English, as exemplified by RFC 6880 [6] > > > > > > > > > Please let us know your preference, if you have not already, no later > > > than 23:59 UTC on 2015-12-16. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=sacm&gbt=1&index= > > > UGE7tF3SO-e3Bo1AkwVHVvtvu3s > > > > > > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7326/ > > > > > > [3] > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burbridge-lmap-information-mode > > > l/ > > > > > > [4] http://www.uml-diagrams.org/ > > > > > > [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity%E2%80%93relationship_model > > > > > > [6] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6880 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sacm mailing list > > sacm@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > --001a113ea6ee78292305288773a8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

I agree with Dav= e Waltermire:

+1 for Option 2
-1 for Option 4 or Opti= on 5

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mo= bility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secreta= ry - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet P= rinting Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Bl= ue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites= .google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://si= tes.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter=C2= =A0 579 Park Place=C2=A0 Saline, MI=C2=A0 48176=C2=A0 734-944-0094
Summe= r=C2=A0 PO Box 221=C2=A0 Grand Marais, MI 49839=C2=A0 906-494-2434

<= div style=3D"display:inline">

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Waltermire, = David A. <david.waltermire@nist.gov> wrote:
+1 for option 2.

-1 for option 4. I don't believe an ERD (or any other visual form) will= be sufficient to document the IM. It can be provided as a value add, but s= ome text documentation will be needed using one of the other options. I'= ;d say the same for UML if it is purely used in a visually rendered form.
Thanks,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounc= es@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam W.
> Montville
> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 4:47 PM
> To: sacm@ietf.org
> Subject: [sacm] IM Expression Consensus Call Redux (WAS: Re: Consensus=
> Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax)
>
> Hi again.=C2=A0 After going through the multiple threads on this topic= , it's not really
> clear which approach people would like to take.=C2=A0 This is in part = because some
> people changed their preference between the two threads.
>
> For the record, here's what I was able to count (I think):
>
> Option 1: 3 (one person also voted for Option 3) Option 2: 1 (a first<= br> > preference for one person) Option 3: 3 (one person also voted for Opti= on 1)
> Option 4: 0 Option 5: 5 (one of which is an individual's second pr= eference;
> another of which would switch from Option 3)
>
> I've heard, privately, some strong arguments against using English= .
> I've heard rather reasonable arguments in favor of it.
>
> Given the confusion along the way, let's restart this consensus ca= ll based on
> the options as originally indicated (see message below). Let's lea= ve it open
> until midnight (UTC) January 7.=C2=A0 We need to arrive at some conclu= sion very
> soon, so that we can start making tangible progress on expressing the = IM.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Adam
>
>
> On 12/02/2015 09:19 AM, Adam W. Montville wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > This message starts a two-week consensus call for selecting an > > expression syntax for our Information Model.=C2=A0 Danny has alre= ady
> > started a thread on the subject [1].=C2=A0 There are five options= in total:
> >
> > Option 1: RFC 7326 - Energy Management Framework [2]
> >
> > Option 2: Information Model for Large-Scale Measurement Platforms= [3]
> >
> > Option 3: Unified Modeling Language [4]
> >
> > Option 4: Entity-relationship Diagram [5]
> >
> > Option 5: Plain English, as exemplified by RFC 6880 [6]
> >
> >
> > Please let us know your preference, if you have not already, no l= ater
> > than 23:59 UTC on 2015-12-16.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > http= s://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=3Dsacm&gbt=3D1&ind= ex=3D
> > UGE7tF3SO-e3Bo1AkwVHVvtvu3s
> >
> > [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7326/=
> >
> > [3]
> > https://datatracker.= ietf.org/doc/draft-burbridge-lmap-information-mode
> > l/
> >
> > [4] http://www.uml-diagrams.org/
> >
> > [5] https://en.wikipedia.or= g/wiki/Entity%E2%80%93relationship_model
> >
> > [6] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6880
>
> _______________________________________________
> sacm mailing list
> sacm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

--001a113ea6ee78292305288773a8-- From nobody Mon Jan 4 14:32:26 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4841AC437 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:32:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -14.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JllrArcJVnRL for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:32:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80C9E1AC436 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:32:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1121; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1451946743; x=1453156343; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=iX00wTCr5UZ9BJ/2AuYTXtuvdNp5xhMSmdObfvbDYXA=; b=OOFTXyPl/HXoNkIbBn1tHveRWrxp/lo7rByco2v1bOqeQMp17pZ9PGTh GRwTWYiHHpWfhz6m540nFJOD7mgCMZWl3kOVrtYFunZLDaq5L9z9b2aNL /dBNJDV/ZwkYbODVdrqsBEwMvyt1Nt76CezZIkGwMQdWZjOESKpCjoLs+ U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ABAgCl8opW/5xdJa1egzpSbQaIU7N3A?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZBgKhW0CgR44FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQ1AQEEAQEBaxsCAQgYLicLJQIEARKILw7?= =?us-ascii?q?BQwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGASGV4R+hFWEZwWTCoN8AY1QjnuOOQEgAQFCh?= =?us-ascii?q?ApyhAiBCAEBAQ?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,522,1444694400"; d="scan'208";a="222715143" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Jan 2016 22:32:22 +0000 Received: from XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (xch-rtp-011.cisco.com [64.101.220.151]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u04MWMOi032392 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:32:22 GMT Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-011.cisco.com (64.101.220.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:32:21 -0500 Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:32:21 -0500 From: "Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing)" To: Leif Johansson , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AQHRRz/GNrAcnvGlFUeGvCzakD7V1w== Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 22:32:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> In-Reply-To: <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.5.9.151119 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [10.24.96.186] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 22:32:25 -0000 I must admit that I too am torn as UML can be a good way to express the IM. However, imho no matter what we choose, the interpretation has to be expressed in English so that the IM representation is well understood by all. That is, we really need to focus on the content and intent (which I believe must be in written [english] prose anyway). =8A.hmmm, so I guess given that argument I would lean to option 5 (English)= =8A. Nancy. On 12/29/15, 11:45 AM, "sacm on behalf of Leif Johansson" wrote: >On 2015-12-29 20:28, Wolfkiel, Joseph L CIV DISA ID (US) wrote: >> I'm not wedded to UML. If throwing my vote to plain English would make >>this move along, I'm fine with it. >>=20 > >How are you going to represent UML in an I-D? Publish under the new >format rules and do SVG? > >Lets just make sure the mechanics of playing with the arrows take >more time and energy than the content. > > Cheers Leif > >_______________________________________________ >sacm mailing list >sacm@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Tue Jan 5 06:51:17 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietf.org Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E393E1A8777; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 06:51:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.11.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160105145116.31090.79618.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 06:51:16 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: sacm@ietf.org Subject: [sacm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sacm-information-model-03.txt X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 14:51:17 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring Working Group of the IETF. Title : SACM Information Model Authors : David Waltermire Kim Watson Clifford Kahn Lisa Lorenzin Daniel Haynes Filename : draft-ietf-sacm-information-model-03.txt Pages : 93 Date : 2016-01-05 Abstract: This document proposes an information model for SACM. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sacm-information-model-03 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Jan 5 14:01:23 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643C31B2D7C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:01:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TPghiad3NqZk for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:01:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from shetland.sei.cmu.edu (shetland.sei.cmu.edu [192.58.107.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 807471B2D7B for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 14:01:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from pawpaw.sei.cmu.edu (pawpaw.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.22]) by shetland.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1408) with ESMTP id u05M1J1k013182 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:01:19 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cert.org; s=jthatj15xw2j; t=1452031279; bh=XVT/ktbN4msPJpU/oM8vwylL3csNiIt36wAwlix2yU8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version: Sender:Reply-To:Cc; b=VoV1vsIHviTqsTYL86GOVL5A5h8ggOI2eV3OLchBctyxdItSlZIXQURIKk+gKWgCR n2DmWD/xGGuvcknd+jCTwnego9aWITeZnAOo1Jv+9Lx8DojMLs/jpDCIjVupOs/uw1 kZepv0It9T3A/inur3Nj6xoXy7A0ofaQgL+OEA6E= Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by pawpaw.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1456) with ESMTP id u05M1TVo012093 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:01:29 -0500 Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 17:01:17 -0500 From: Chris Inacio To: "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisXsXR5EDO3kax7y4Nt5xkxQALGW6AATOQP4AAMTSyAA== Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:01:16 +0000 Message-ID: <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.51.97] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <2CE7766930084E4B8A336EF7EA610935@sei.cmu.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 22:01:22 -0000 Can we do the preference list voting thing? (Just for fun at this point=85= :) Let=92s use the Aussie system=85 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inst= ant-runoff_voting 5 2 1 3 4 -- Chris Inacio inacio@cert.org > On Jan 4, 2016, at 5:32 PM, Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) wrote: >=20 >=20 > I must admit that I too am torn as UML can be a good way to express the > IM. However, imho no matter what we choose, the interpretation has to be > expressed in English so that the IM representation is well understood by > all. That is, we really need to focus on the content and intent (which I > believe must be in written [english] prose anyway). >=20 > =8A.hmmm, so I guess given that argument I would lean to option 5 (Englis= h)=8A. >=20 > Nancy. >=20 > On 12/29/15, 11:45 AM, "sacm on behalf of Leif Johansson" > wrote: >=20 >> On 2015-12-29 20:28, Wolfkiel, Joseph L CIV DISA ID (US) wrote: >>> I'm not wedded to UML. If throwing my vote to plain English would make >>> this move along, I'm fine with it. >>>=20 >>=20 >> How are you going to represent UML in an I-D? Publish under the new >> format rules and do SVG? >>=20 >> Lets just make sure the mechanics of playing with the arrows take >> more time and energy than the content. >>=20 >> Cheers Leif >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sacm mailing list >> sacm@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm >=20 From nobody Tue Jan 5 19:32:28 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C371A8AE0 for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 19:32:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ds0q7hcXgv_c for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 19:32:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe16:19:96:114:154:164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 208AD1A890C for ; Tue, 5 Jan 2016 19:32:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from resomta-po-20v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.244]) by resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id 2TXv1s0025Geu2801TYPhM; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:32:23 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.13] ([72.200.136.101]) by resomta-po-20v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id 2TYA1s00F2BSQ9k01TYD3n; Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:32:21 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: David Harrington X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13C75) In-Reply-To: <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 22:32:10 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> To: Chris Inacio DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1452051143; bh=9M/INqp5NxGOtTPmtz3X7KdHToPji1mMzjogPZ1mlMc=; h=Received:Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:Date: Message-Id:To; b=jRAO4quU5T9ym3lJ/A/97znYUly7Zv0HKaAnYX6OtfEi+GO6FMK94E475fe89+fYJ vyV+bh+TzvO5YFKjHbFXQIIJ/x1rFH3ZiiREh7neTQnUuslrBbGoYTqO3QZWtuTTen CbRRH8J4r5tjr3AYkDRtETmk0ppBs61fvCH4/cDt89X00GEnpOaI0I8cT170yr4yln 70gpc6GQWZMgBVnhSX8LXZnHqnRnCblC7pmbQ8PoFZM4NeMSEF3kvlWCY/2JqwyVHn ZVQscIdldKspiohwRWdPUzej0eLCqHrRyG6ehkAHPtpMDr7gxBsRxg3UrnfWhjpsJi lY8o3t97P6GTg== Archived-At: Cc: "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 03:32:27 -0000 What are the numbers again? I know 5 is english, my preference but i forget what each of the others repr= esent.=20 David Harrington Dbharrington@comcast.net 603-828-1401 > On Jan 5, 2016, at 5:01 PM, Chris Inacio wrote: >=20 >=20 > Can we do the preference list voting thing? (Just for fun at this point=E2= =80=A6 :) Let=E2=80=99s use the Aussie system=E2=80=A6 https://en.wikipe= dia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting >=20 > 5 > 2 > 1 > 3 > 4 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -- > Chris Inacio > inacio@cert.org >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Jan 4, 2016, at 5:32 PM, Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> I must admit that I too am torn as UML can be a good way to express the >> IM. However, imho no matter what we choose, the interpretation has to be= >> expressed in English so that the IM representation is well understood by >> all. That is, we really need to focus on the content and intent (which I= >> believe must be in written [english] prose anyway). >>=20 >> =C5=A0.hmmm, so I guess given that argument I would lean to option 5 (Eng= lish)=C5=A0. >>=20 >> Nancy. >>=20 >> On 12/29/15, 11:45 AM, "sacm on behalf of Leif Johansson" >> wrote: >>=20 >>>> On 2015-12-29 20:28, Wolfkiel, Joseph L CIV DISA ID (US) wrote: >>>> I'm not wedded to UML. If throwing my vote to plain English would make= >>>> this move along, I'm fine with it. >>>=20 >>> How are you going to represent UML in an I-D? Publish under the new >>> format rules and do SVG? >>>=20 >>> Lets just make sure the mechanics of playing with the arrows take >>> more time and energy than the content. >>>=20 >>> Cheers Leif >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sacm mailing list >>> sacm@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> sacm mailing list >> sacm@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Wed Jan 6 06:55:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9C1C1B2DB7 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:55:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.009 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id od-TRGDr9Vu2 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:55:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC14C1B2DAF for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 06:55:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 06:55:53 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1452092153; bh=WC8ZzWKdlZtg5s7GVhhDeAQpKVqQYpBLpoyuYrBgAOs=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=h9mzy03nGYZy6/ZC2KlXPuNI57hx449cvYuq/v4l7EJDeaiSdLRT44j8Y6JRS4jDO i42tFYXgper6qByHL+yrkJxsfvp5gQqADuc1OxfmF0vitKFjxkaardIttEfcPApAJJ fc/Z3WLB5cekvfzsOp97806bO1PuQzHgg7t3q15g= From: Danny Haynes To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_568d2af9c8fca_15763fbcf0ec92c052179f"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: djhaynes X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] is whether or not attributes were collected in an authenticated or unauthenticated manner metadata we care about? (#35) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:55:56 -0000 ----==_mimepart_568d2af9c8fca_15763fbcf0ec92c052179f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As part of feedback on the vulnerability assessment scenario, it was asked if authenticated data always takes precedence over unauthenticated data This needs to be discussed further, but, we should consider whether or not attributes were collected in a authenticated or unauthenticated manner is metadata that we care about and if we should include it in the information model (eg similar how we want to capture if an attribute can be used for designation/identification or if it is has privacy concerns) Please see the following mailing list thread for more information http://wwwietforg/mail-archive/web/sacm/current/msg03597html --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/35 ----==_mimepart_568d2af9c8fca_15763fbcf0ec92c052179f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As part of feedback on the vulnerability assessment scenario, it was asked if authenticated data always takes precedence over unauthenticated data This needs to be discussed further, but, we should consider whether or not attributes were collected in a authenticated or unauthenticated manner is metadata that we care about and if we should include it in the information model (eg similar how we want to capture if an attribute can be used for designation/identification or if it is has privacy concerns)

Please see the following mailing list thread for more information

http://wwwietforg/mail-archive/web/sacm/current/msg03597html

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_568d2af9c8fca_15763fbcf0ec92c052179f-- From nobody Wed Jan 6 12:15:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5F8A1A01E2 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:15:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sKKeozpTjZIl for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:15:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (plainfield.sei.cmu.edu [192.58.107.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1A091A01D7 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:15:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from timber.sei.cmu.edu (timber.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.23]) by plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1408) with ESMTP id u06KFU8G018270; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:15:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cert.org; s=jthatj15xw2j; t=1452111330; bh=PF1YFkX5wDoqZUw2Y/5W0Xdbq2amBgLG7UOvkW/5qDc=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version: Sender:Reply-To; b=ckkODLvhOAvp9v+l2qIMfY0IniUpMdayds19QABQsASYkwC4MA6vx4jSc/6RSKpF7 q7VCAfIoG3dWWFpR0XjX7yZl0P7BTxGtujqEx4xV9TJeDAaAjEIE52g6tGg7VwfV8I 8jhn5o3BUTZI3o3fkSyzb52Z9Hkc/hWBk1gOhhAk= Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by timber.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1456) with ESMTP id u06KFSCv023550; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:15:29 -0500 Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:15:28 -0500 From: Chris Inacio To: David Harrington Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisXsXR5EDO3kax7y4Nt5xkxQALGW6AATOQP4AAMTSyAAALjnoAACMKDoA= Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 20:15:27 +0000 Message-ID: <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.51.97] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <51D0302CE39A2A41B07A7E4D01919D32@sei.cmu.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 20:15:34 -0000 bm8gZ29vZCBjYW4gY29tZSBmcm9tIG15IGVkaXRvcmlhbGl6aW5nIGFib3V0IHdoYXQgdGhlc2Ug dGhpbmdzIGFyZSwgYnV0IEnigJltIGRvaW5nIGl0IGFueXdheeKApg0KDQpJ4oCZbSBhbm5vdGF0 aW5nIG15IGxpc3QuDQoNCj4gT24gSmFuIDUsIDIwMTYsIGF0IDEwOjMyIFBNLCBEYXZpZCBIYXJy aW5ndG9uIDxkYmhhcnJpbmd0b25AY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ+IHdyb3RlOg0KPiANCj4gV2hhdCBhcmUg dGhlIG51bWJlcnMgYWdhaW4/DQo+IEkga25vdyA1IGlzIGVuZ2xpc2gsIG15IHByZWZlcmVuY2Ug YnV0IGkgZm9yZ2V0IHdoYXQgZWFjaCBvZiB0aGUgb3RoZXJzIHJlcHJlc2VudC4gDQo+IA0KPiBE YXZpZCBIYXJyaW5ndG9uDQo+IERiaGFycmluZ3RvbkBjb21jYXN0Lm5ldA0KPiA2MDMtODI4LTE0 MDENCj4gDQo+IA0KPj4gT24gSmFuIDUsIDIwMTYsIGF0IDU6MDEgUE0sIENocmlzIEluYWNpbyA8 aW5hY2lvQGNlcnQub3JnPiB3cm90ZToNCj4+IA0KPj4gDQo+PiBDYW4gd2UgZG8gdGhlIHByZWZl cmVuY2UgbGlzdCB2b3RpbmcgdGhpbmc/ICAoSnVzdCBmb3IgZnVuIGF0IHRoaXMgcG9pbnTigKYg IDopICBMZXTigJlzIHVzZSB0aGUgQXVzc2llIHN5c3RlbeKApiAgIGh0dHBzOi8vZW4ud2lraXBl ZGlhLm9yZy93aWtpL0luc3RhbnQtcnVub2ZmX3ZvdGluZw0KPj4gDQo+PiA1IC0gRW5nbGlzaCAo YSBiaXQgb2YgcHJvc2UgKyBhIGJpdCBvZiBkbyB3aGF0ZXZlciB3b3Jrcy95b3UgbGlrZSkNCj4+ IDIgLSBMTUFQIEFEVCB0ZXh0IChkZXNjcmliZXMgQURUcyBpbiBzZW1pIHN0cnVjdHVyZWQgZW5n bGlzaCB0ZXh0KQ0KPj4gMSAtIEVNQU4gVU1MIGluIHRleHQgKFVNTCBpbiBzZW1pIHN0cnVjdHVy ZWQgZW5nbGlzaCB0ZXh0KQ0KPj4gMyAtIFVNTA0KPj4gNCAtIEVSIGRpYWdyYW1zDQo+PiANCj4+ IA0KPj4gDQoNCmNoZWVycw0KLS0NCkNocmlzIEluYWNpbw0KaW5hY2lvQGNlcnQub3JnDQoNCg0K DQoNCj4+IA0KPj4gDQo+PiAtLQ0KPj4gQ2hyaXMgSW5hY2lvDQo+PiBpbmFjaW9AY2VydC5vcmcN Cj4+IA0KPj4gDQo+PiANCj4+PiBPbiBKYW4gNCwgMjAxNiwgYXQgNTozMiBQTSwgTmFuY3kgQ2Ft LVdpbmdldCAobmNhbXdpbmcpIDxuY2Ftd2luZ0BjaXNjby5jb20+IHdyb3RlOg0KPj4+IA0KPj4+ IA0KPj4+IEkgbXVzdCBhZG1pdCB0aGF0IEkgdG9vIGFtIHRvcm4gYXMgVU1MIGNhbiBiZSBhIGdv b2Qgd2F5IHRvIGV4cHJlc3MgdGhlDQo+Pj4gSU0uICBIb3dldmVyLCBpbWhvIG5vIG1hdHRlciB3 aGF0IHdlIGNob29zZSwgdGhlIGludGVycHJldGF0aW9uIGhhcyB0byBiZQ0KPj4+IGV4cHJlc3Nl ZCBpbiBFbmdsaXNoIHNvIHRoYXQgdGhlIElNIHJlcHJlc2VudGF0aW9uIGlzIHdlbGwgdW5kZXJz dG9vZCBieQ0KPj4+IGFsbC4gIFRoYXQgaXMsIHdlIHJlYWxseSBuZWVkIHRvIGZvY3VzIG9uIHRo ZSBjb250ZW50IGFuZCBpbnRlbnQgKHdoaWNoIEkNCj4+PiBiZWxpZXZlIG11c3QgYmUgaW4gd3Jp dHRlbiBbZW5nbGlzaF0gcHJvc2UgYW55d2F5KS4NCj4+PiANCj4+PiDFoC5obW1tLCBzbyBJIGd1 ZXNzIGdpdmVuIHRoYXQgYXJndW1lbnQgSSB3b3VsZCBsZWFuIHRvIG9wdGlvbiA1IChFbmdsaXNo KcWgLg0KPj4+IA0KPj4+ICAgTmFuY3kuDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gT24gMTIvMjkvMTUsIDExOjQ1IEFN LCAic2FjbSBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgTGVpZiBKb2hhbnNzb24iDQo+Pj4gPHNhY20tYm91bmNlc0Bp ZXRmLm9yZyBvbiBiZWhhbGYgb2YgbGVpZmpAbW50LnNlPiB3cm90ZToNCj4+PiANCj4+Pj4+IE9u IDIwMTUtMTItMjkgMjA6MjgsIFdvbGZraWVsLCBKb3NlcGggTCBDSVYgRElTQSBJRCAoVVMpIHdy b3RlOg0KPj4+Pj4gSSdtIG5vdCB3ZWRkZWQgdG8gVU1MLiAgSWYgdGhyb3dpbmcgbXkgdm90ZSB0 byBwbGFpbiBFbmdsaXNoIHdvdWxkIG1ha2UNCj4+Pj4+IHRoaXMgbW92ZSBhbG9uZywgSSdtIGZp bmUgd2l0aCBpdC4NCj4+Pj4gDQo+Pj4+IEhvdyBhcmUgeW91IGdvaW5nIHRvIHJlcHJlc2VudCBV TUwgaW4gYW4gSS1EPyBQdWJsaXNoIHVuZGVyIHRoZSBuZXcNCj4+Pj4gZm9ybWF0IHJ1bGVzIGFu ZCBkbyBTVkc/DQo+Pj4+IA0KPj4+PiBMZXRzIGp1c3QgbWFrZSBzdXJlIHRoZSBtZWNoYW5pY3Mg b2YgcGxheWluZyB3aXRoIHRoZSBhcnJvd3MgdGFrZQ0KPj4+PiBtb3JlIHRpbWUgYW5kIGVuZXJn eSB0aGFuIHRoZSBjb250ZW50Lg0KPj4+PiANCj4+Pj4gICBDaGVlcnMgTGVpZg0KPj4+PiANCj4+ Pj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+Pj4g c2FjbSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4+Pj4gc2FjbUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5p ZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NhY20NCj4+PiANCj4+PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXw0KPj4+IHNhY20gbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+ Pj4gc2FjbUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGlu Zm8vc2FjbQ0KPj4gDQo+PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXw0KPj4gc2FjbSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4+IHNhY21AaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IGh0dHBz Oi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vc2FjbQ0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gc2FjbSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QN Cj4gc2FjbUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L3NhY20NCg0K From nobody Wed Jan 6 17:08:26 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 692D11A21B4 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:08:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cPvxo64noHIw for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:08:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B236D1A3B9B for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:08:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CCO87657; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:08:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.218.25.36) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 01:08:19 +0000 Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.81]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.130]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:08:13 -0800 From: John Strassner To: Iain Bell , Adam Montville Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdEu29iVbIX+TMrAR9e04Zkh3BQlCgAg2RIABNEIEAAAABFKAAAC8KiAAAFYhIAAACDIgAAO6t+AAX1fyaA= Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 01:08:12 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006326452B@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <9FF80B73-D14B-4CA1-97CE-606F6FEAB4C7@gmail.com> <5682DA3D.5010803@gmail.com> <5682E345.9060006@mnt.se> <71801FEB-E831-4A67-9BF3-6CA2C7F786D1@gmail.com> <6C5F291E-3515-4C42-AD5E-86230296614D@keryx.im> In-Reply-To: <6C5F291E-3515-4C42-AD5E-86230296614D@keryx.im> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.96.255.167] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020204.568DBA84.004F, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.81, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 1af0fb02ed052a7bb9e65491a73d288b Archived-At: Cc: Leif Johansson , "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:08:24 -0000 KzENCg0KTm93LCBpZiB5b3Ugd2FudCBzcGVjaWZpY2l0eSwgdGhlbiBJIHdvdWxkIHJlY29tbWVu ZCB1c2luZyBhIGZvcm1hbCBjb25zdHJhaW50IGxhbmd1YWdlLCBzdWNoIGFzIE9DTCAyLjQgKHRo b3VnaCBwZXJzb25hbGx5LCBJIHByZWZlciBBbGxveSkuIFdoaWxlIEkgZW1wYXRoaXplIHdpdGgg dGhlIGRlc2lyZSB0byBtYWtlIHRoaW5ncyByZWFkYWJsZSwgdGhlcmUgYXJlIHNpbXBseSB0b28g bWFueSBhbWJpZ3VpdGllcyBpbiB1c2luZyBFbmdsaXNoDQoNCnJlZ2FyZHMsDQpKb2huIA0KDQot LS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogc2FjbSBbbWFpbHRvOnNhY20tYm91bmNl c0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIElhaW4gQmVsbA0KU2VudDogVHVlc2RheSwgRGVjZW1i ZXIgMjksIDIwMTUgNjo1OCBQTQ0KVG86IEFkYW0gTW9udHZpbGxlDQpDYzogTGVpZiBKb2hhbnNz b247IHNhY21AaWV0Zi5vcmcNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbc2FjbV0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIENhbGw6IENo b29zaW5nIGFuIElNIEV4cHJlc3Npb24gU3ludGF4DQoNCkZvciB3aGF0IGl0J3Mgd29ydGggKCBp ZiBhbnl0aGluZyBhdCBzdWNoIGEgbGF0ZSBzdGFnZSkgSSB0aGluayB1bWwgaXMgdGhlIHdheSBm b3J3YXJkLiBJdCBoYXMgaXRzIGxpbWl0YXRpb25zIGhvd2V2ZXIgYXQgbGVhc3QgdGhlc2UgYXJl IHF1YW50aWZpYWJsZS4gV2hlcmUgYXMgcGxhaW4gb2xkIEVuZ2xpc2ggaXMgYW55dGhpbmcgYnV0 IHBsYWluDQoNClNlbnQgZnJvbSBteSBpUGhvbmUNCg0KPiBPbiAyOSBEZWMgMjAxNSwgYXQgMTk6 NTAsIEFkYW0gTW9udHZpbGxlIDxhZGFtLncubW9udHZpbGxlQGdtYWlsLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+ IA0KPiBDb250cmlidXRvciBoYXQgb246IEnigJltIGdvaW5nIHRvICsxIGZvciBwbGFpbiBFbmds aXNoIGFzIHdlbGwuIA0KPiANCj4+IE9uIERlYyAyOSwgMjAxNSwgYXQgMTo0NyBQTSwgTGVpZiBK b2hhbnNzb24gPGxlaWZqQG1udC5zZT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+PiANCj4+IE9uIDIwMTUtMTItMjkgMjA6 MDgsIEFkYW0gVy4gTW9udHZpbGxlIHdyb3RlOg0KPj4+IE9rLiAgSXQgc2VlbXMgdGhhdCB3ZSd2 ZSBnb3QgYSBjb3VwbGUgb2YgcGVvcGxlIGluIGZhdm9yIG9mIFVNTCAoT3B0aW9uDQo+Pj4gMyks IG9uZSBpbiBmYXZvciBvZiB0aGUgSW5mb3JtYXRpb24gTW9kZWwgZm9yIExhcmdlLVNjYWxlIE1l YXN1cmVtZW50DQo+Pj4gUGxhdGZvcm1zIChPcHRpb24gMiksIGFuZCBhIGNvdXBsZSBpbiBmYXZv ciBvZiBwbGFpbiBFbmdsaXNoIChPcHRpb24gNSkuDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gR2l2ZW4gdGhlIGluZm9y bWF0aW9uIGF0IGhhbmQsIHdlJ3ZlIGdvdCBlaXRoZXIgVU1MIG9yIHBsYWluIEVuZ2xpc2ggYXQN Cj4+PiBwbGF5LiAgSSBnZW5lcmFsbHkgcHJlZmVyIHNvbWV0aGluZyBtb3JlIHN0cnVjdXRyZWQs IGxpa2UgVU1MLCBidXQgSSBhbQ0KPj4+IGFsc28gc2Vuc2l0aXZlIHRvIHRoZSBjb21wbGljYXRp b25zIHVzaW5nIFVNTCBtYXkgaW50cm9kdWNlIChhcyBwb2ludGVkDQo+Pj4gb3V0IGJ5IERhdmlk IEhhcnJpbmd0b24gYW5kIEppbSBTY2hhYWQpLiANCj4+PiANCj4+PiBBdCB0aGlzIHBvaW50LCBJ J2QgbGlrZSB0byBhc2sgb25lIGZvbGxvdy11cCBxdWVzdGlvbi4gIFdobyBvYmplY3RzIHRvDQo+ Pj4gcGxhaW4gRW5nbGlzaCBmb3Igb3VyIHByZWZlcnJlZCBtZXRob2Qgb2YgZXhwcmVzc2luZyB0 aGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gbW9kZWw/DQo+PiANCj4+IEknbGwgZ28gb24gcmVjb3JkIHdpdGggYSAr MSBmb3IgcGxhaW4gRW5nbGlzaCBiZWNhdXNlIGl0IGhvcGVmdWxseSBoZWxwcw0KPj4gdGhlIFdH IHRvIGZvY3VzIG9uIGNvbnRlbnQuDQo+PiANCj4+ICAgIENoZWVycyBMZWlmDQo+PiAgICANCj4+ IA0KPj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+ IHNhY20gbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+PiBzYWNtQGlldGYub3JnDQo+PiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NhY20NCj4gDQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IHNhY20gbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+IHNhY21AaWV0 Zi5vcmcNCj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9zYWNtDQoNCl9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQpzYWNtIG1haWxp bmcgbGlzdA0Kc2FjbUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0 aW5mby9zYWNtDQo= From nobody Wed Jan 6 17:13:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 467A11A3B9B for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:13:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.211 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uOv-YW6g9eUp for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:13:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 708B81A21C0 for ; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CGL01744; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:13:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.218.25.36) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 01:13:51 +0000 Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.81]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.130]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Wed, 6 Jan 2016 17:13:44 -0800 From: John Strassner To: Leif Johansson , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisbIX+TMrAR9e04Zkh3BQlCgARYsGAAYzh43A= Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 01:13:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> In-Reply-To: <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.96.255.167] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.568DBBCF.0178, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.3.81, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 35db3d25a61f24ffb7d4b5a1c1731f2c Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:13:55 -0000 Take at look at draft-strassner-supa-generic-policy-info-model-03, section = 3 (symbology) as one possible example. regards, John =09 -----Original Message----- From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Leif Johansson Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 11:46 AM To: sacm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax On 2015-12-29 20:28, Wolfkiel, Joseph L CIV DISA ID (US) wrote: > I'm not wedded to UML. If throwing my vote to plain English would make t= his move along, I'm fine with it. >=20 How are you going to represent UML in an I-D? Publish under the new format rules and do SVG? Lets just make sure the mechanics of playing with the arrows take more time and energy than the content. Cheers Leif _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Thu Jan 7 02:34:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A787C1A8871 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 02:34:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ypQl9O07shkC for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 02:34:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7827A1A874F for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 02:34:48 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2DyAQDrPo5W/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK4FFiFOzUwENgWSGDwIcgQY4FAEBAQEBAQF/C4Q1AQEBAxIREVUCAQgNDQIGIAICAjAVEAIEGxqIDQGmJIpdkF4BAQEHAQEBAQEBHYEBhVeEfYRXgxwugRsFlwsBlxKFPo5NIAEBQoQKhUsBgQcBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A2DyAQDrPo5W/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK4FFiFOzUwENgWSGDwIcgQY4FAEBAQEBAQF/C4Q1AQEBAxIREVUCAQgNDQIGIAICAjAVEAIEGxqIDQGmJIpdkF4BAQEHAQEBAQEBHYEBhVeEfYRXgxwugRsFlwsBlxKFPo5NIAEBQoQKhUsBgQcBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,532,1444708800"; d="scan'208";a="154999461" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Jan 2016 05:34:47 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.12]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 07 Jan 2016 05:34:42 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC02.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.12]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:34:41 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisXsXR5EDO3kax7y4Nt5xkxQALGW6AATOQP4AAMTSyAAALjnoAACMKDoAAEzQTwA== Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:34:40 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> In-Reply-To: <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.48] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 10:34:50 -0000 SGksDQoNCkF0IElFVEYgOTQgSSBwb2ludGVkIHRvIHRoZSBXRyBhIHBvc3NpYmxlIG9wdGlvbiA2 ICgnSVBGSVgnIC0gYXMgcGVyIFJGQyA3MTAyKSB3aGljaCB3b3VsZCBiZSBteSBwcmVmZXJlbmNl LiBUaGlzIHdhcyBub3QgaW5jbHVkZWQgaW4gdGhlIENvbnNlbnN1cyBDYWxsLiBJdCBzdGlsbCB3 b3VsZCBiZSBteSBwcmVmZXJlbmNlLiANCg0KRnJvbSB0aGUgb3RoZXIgNSBvcHRpb25zIG15IHBy ZWZlcmVuY2UgaXMgZm9yIG9wdGlvbiAyICgnTE1BUCcpIGZvbGxvd2VkIGJ5IDUgKCdFbmdsaXNo JykuDQoNCkkgZG8gbm90IGtub3cgb2YgYW55IHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWwgdXNlIG9mIFVNTCBpbiB0aGUg SUVURi4gVGhlcmUgYXJlIHNldmVyYWwgZGlmZmVyZW50IHJlYXNvbnMgZm9yIHRoaXMuIA0KDQpS ZWdhcmRzLA0KDQpEYW4NCg0KDQoNCg0K From nobody Thu Jan 7 06:37:14 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687321A8A5A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:37:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5EtGD9ef_OcA for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:37:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org [192.52.194.136]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E13A1A8AC0 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:37:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 122106C08E0; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:37:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (imshyb02.mitre.org [129.83.29.3]) by smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026BC6C08E2; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:37:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) by imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:37:09 -0500 Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.140.19.249) by imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:37:09 -0500 Received: from BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.255.212.24) by BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.255.212.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:37:03 +0000 Received: from BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.212.24]) by BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.212.24]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:37:03 +0000 From: "Haynes, Dan" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwis7F3uSvyUuUaiDH4zlXZMhQAAnzmAATOQPoAAMTSzAAALjnoAACMKDYAAHgH/AAAGWPQg Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:37:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dhaynes@mitre.org; x-originating-ip: [192.160.51.89] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR09MB104; 5:4x/RmdiBugcnmz8Fc+4ygz78gQNKvK44rjLoTZ9BY9KTJMyleT/KqTpmisVtk6YzMVvWAOdRB+wnv9IDCTtPxNfB5D0+ennCVDe7wT2l1OhbKX4vmg23C0vwwisr4cHskPrH7aDYk9m77rKyELZK7g==; 24:GbDa1WejS4gQJQanPt318nCdlevwiZOMR7Wb6lJ8jRhfij9QMe14N+PMvY5uNaHCHtdG0InyOT7C/uTo+PHBYrmryxwsJ8gTlAnB+Bw4aQw= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 3f44d051-2dd0-429e-8955-08d3177002ab x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; x-forefront-prvs: 0814A2C7A3 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(199003)(377454003)(13464003)(164054003)(189002)(107886002)(5001960100002)(33656002)(189998001)(50986999)(54356999)(76176999)(10400500002)(101416001)(19580395003)(86362001)(11100500001)(87936001)(19580405001)(97736004)(81156007)(5001770100001)(93886004)(5004730100002)(74316001)(76576001)(2950100001)(2900100001)(15975445007)(77096005)(5008740100001)(1220700001)(1096002)(586003)(122556002)(6116002)(102836003)(3846002)(2906002)(2501003)(92566002)(66066001)(5003600100002)(5002640100001)(105586002)(106356001)(99286002)(40100003)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; H:BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: mitre.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Jan 2016 14:37:03.5600 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: c620dc48-1d50-4952-8b39-df4d54d74d82 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR09MB104 X-OriginatorOrg: mitre.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:37:12 -0000 Hi Dan, Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012 (https://= www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt) correct? Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields that are r= equired for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM elements in terms o= f those fields? Or, are you more specifically suggesting that we should ju= st use the fields listed in the document (name, elementID, description, dat= atype, etc.)? With that said, I think this format could work well for defining attributes= in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with. We could probably also lev= erage many of their naming conventions, etc. and save some more time :). H= owever, I did not see any examples of compound IM elements that were made u= p of multiple IM elements defined using this format. An example from SACM = might be a network interface that consists of an IP address, MAC address, f= lags, etc. Are there any examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong = place)? Is it something that we would have to figure out and decide on? O= r, is it just something that is addressed at the data model level? That is= , the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are free to = combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide whether or not= they wanted to create a network interface construct that ties together a b= unch of attributes). =20 Thanks, Danny -----Original Message----- From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 5:35 AM To: sacm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Hi, At IETF 94 I pointed to the WG a possible option 6 ('IPFIX' - as per RFC 71= 02) which would be my preference. This was not included in the Consensus Ca= ll. It still would be my preference.=20 >From the other 5 options my preference is for option 2 ('LMAP') followed by= 5 ('English'). I do not know of any successful use of UML in the IETF. There are several d= ifferent reasons for this.=20 Regards, Dan _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Thu Jan 7 06:52:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8207A1A8AE5 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:52:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0RC3Hjl8u8eD for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:52:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98B181A8AE4 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 06:52:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 06:52:20 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1452178340; bh=zuBvYoxXswywKs1As5w5Je+CDgxDMrcxfwBM6ImwhRw=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=DN983Yc+lC3UbdeBaUYdt7ZX4nbM3Xr0p+q0l/y43AFDIGch6ngLyfG4zjx8FQqwn ONO087I0zkwxkWTo1iJL59QF2GQ6BPnf3rZm9GP++jEan1gmjAFEwEpvt3oMG8Haz1 /RxrQwhUjPbyQewpBQkEbX5kvvvWUP0mPrnwjSGM= From: Danny Haynes To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_568e7ba496bd4_94d3f96ce3152a032479e"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: djhaynes X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] is whether or not attributes were collected in an authenticated or unauthenticated manner metadata we care about? (#35) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 14:52:23 -0000 ----==_mimepart_568e7ba496bd4_94d3f96ce3152a032479e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agree. If the WG agrees that authenticated data always takes precedence over unauthenticated data, I think you are correct. However, another option might be to make this precedence configurable in evaluation guidance. Yet another option might be to define an algorithm that specifies how precedence should be handled and when. Anyways, thinking through these options and how we want to handle this is where I think we need further discussion. Agree. Do you have a pointer to the question on the list? Agree. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/35#issuecomment-169685109 ----==_mimepart_568e7ba496bd4_94d3f96ce3152a032479e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Agree.

If the WG agrees that authenticated data always takes precedence over unauthenticated data, I think you are correct. However, another option might be to make this precedence configurable in evaluation guidance. Yet another option might be to define an algorithm that specifies how precedence should be handled and when. Anyways, thinking through these options and how we want to handle this is where I think we need further discussion.

Agree.

Do you have a pointer to the question on the list?

Agree.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_568e7ba496bd4_94d3f96ce3152a032479e-- From nobody Thu Jan 7 07:38:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3CB91A8F49 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:38:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pbo5fRhcZL5k for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:38:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE3571A8F4A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:38:50 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2AdAwBBP8ZV/xUHmMZbGQEBAYJTLFRpBqluBpM2CYIEhXkCgSY4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQjAQEBAQIBEihEBwQCAQgNBAQBAQsUCQcyFAkIAgQBEggaiAQIAQysbKA+AQEBAQEBBAEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBIYfhTKEWDgGgxKBFAWMVYg2AZVbkQQXD4IOHIFTbwGBR4EEAQEB X-IPAS-Result: A2AdAwBBP8ZV/xUHmMZbGQEBAYJTLFRpBqluBpM2CYIEhXkCgSY4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQjAQEBAQIBEihEBwQCAQgNBAQBAQsUCQcyFAkIAgQBEggaiAQIAQysbKA+AQEBAQEBBAEBAQEBAQEBAQEUBIYfhTKEWDgGgxKBFAWMVYg2AZVbkQQXD4IOHIFTbwGBR4EEAQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,634,1432612800"; d="scan'208";a="137698357" Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest-exch.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.21]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Jan 2016 10:38:49 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC04.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.14]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 07 Jan 2016 10:38:47 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC04.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.14]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 16:38:46 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Haynes, Dan" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisXsXR5EDO3kax7y4Nt5xkxQALGW6AATOQP4AAMTSyAAALjnoAACMKDoAAEzQTwAATRP+AAAjXxHA= Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 15:38:46 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.48] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 15:38:53 -0000 Hi Dan, See in-line.=20 DanR > -----Original Message----- > From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes@mitre.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012 > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt ) correct? >=20 Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it.=20 > Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields that are= required > for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM elements in terms of > those fields? Or, are you more specifically suggesting that we should ju= st use > the fields listed in the document (name, elementID, description, datatype= , > etc.)? >=20 I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the Consensus Ca= ll is about.=20 Leveraging already defined fields, naming conventions may be an extra adva= ntage but not essential IMO.=20 =20 > With that said, I think this format could work well for defining attribut= es in > SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with. We could probably also > leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and save some more time > :). However, I did not see any examples of compound IM elements that > were made up of multiple IM elements defined using this format. An > example from SACM might be a network interface that consists of an IP > address, MAC address, flags, etc. Are there any examples of this (I may = have > looked in the wrong place)? Is it something that we would have to figure= out > and decide on? Or, is it just something that is addressed at the data mo= del > level? That is, the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data mo= dels > are free to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide > whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct that t= ies > together a bunch of attributes). >=20 IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in successive p= hases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent as flat lists. T= his started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC 6313 (https://www.rfc-= editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt) defined the Structured Data IEs to deal with th= e more complex cases. (see in section 2.3 the example of an IDS mentioned a= s use case).=20 Regards, Dan =20 From nobody Thu Jan 7 07:44:04 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37591A8F50 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:44:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jheiQ1i3L95w for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:43:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD3E71A8F4F for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:43:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 07:43:56 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1452181436; bh=edcBHTmX5x+y7cAzxQsHZ6rWX66GGzFs5RHx8SV9b40=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zFTWGLW6SAbDh2eX8IlWUgGG46lYrbJ4VAEp4e2hOZB41fh2Z7PY7nlInRZz5zxbj B38Xa13oetcAfP4A19lvLu1UaHMJlLMYT5MgLAUgCrTS6mgKqK8IvWLYL6E2jP7TUa uLUhhS7ZYnqaJR1Lxzyb31iCBnpTF/G3vmXz3Y3M= From: Danny Haynes To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_568e87bc54d2d_274b3faf34d0f2a0272376"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: djhaynes X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: sacm Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] is whether or not attributes were collected in an authenticated or unauthenticated manner metadata we care about? (#35) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 15:44:03 -0000 ----==_mimepart_568e87bc54d2d_274b3faf34d0f2a0272376 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That is a good question and I don't know that I have a definitive answer. Although, I do agree that all authenticated data is not necessarily created equal. It probably depends on the details of the authentication mechanisms. For example, what if the multi-factor authentication includes a mandatory 25-character password, passcode token, fingerprint recognition, and a key to get into the only room where the endpoint/service can be accessed/activated from. That seems like it would be equivalent to a certificate (at least for practical purposes) :). I think when we start getting into the "quality" of something whether it is authentication, collected data, etc. it starts to get very subjective and will likely be something that is dependent on the organization deploying the SACM ecosystem and their risk tolerance. In these cases, I don't think we want to mandate a specific behavior. Rather, I think we want to provide organizations with the information and mechanisms to tailor the SACM ecosystem to address their needs and tolerances. Of course, we need to be careful not to create something that is overly complex and unusable. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/35#issuecomment-169700126 ----==_mimepart_568e87bc54d2d_274b3faf34d0f2a0272376 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

That is a good question and I don't know that I have a definitive answer. Although, I do agree that all authenticated data is not necessarily created equal. It probably depends on the details of the authentication mechanisms. For example, what if the multi-factor authentication includes a mandatory 25-character password, passcode token, fingerprint recognition, and a key to get into the only room where the endpoint/service can be accessed/activated from. That seems like it would be equivalent to a certificate (at least for practical purposes) :).

I think when we start getting into the "quality" of something whether it is authentication, collected data, etc. it starts to get very subjective and will likely be something that is dependent on the organization deploying the SACM ecosystem and their risk tolerance.

In these cases, I don't think we want to mandate a specific behavior. Rather, I think we want to provide organizations with the information and mechanisms to tailor the SACM ecosystem to address their needs and tolerances. Of course, we need to be careful not to create something that is overly complex and unusable.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_568e87bc54d2d_274b3faf34d0f2a0272376-- From nobody Thu Jan 7 08:13:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 379A81A906A for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:13:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.3 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Iwk_U3KsyUv for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (plainfield.sei.cmu.edu [192.58.107.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 307521A9064 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:13:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from timber.sei.cmu.edu (timber.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.23]) by plainfield.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1408) with ESMTP id u07GDHpu014827; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:13:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cert.org; s=jthatj15xw2j; t=1452183197; bh=8xG5T2An0HvJ7sEdYyqGqMGIAvR+0uJMrKP6QVmEjsA=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:Content-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version: Sender:Reply-To; b=XEJPgdmTRahIDSZYh32fgMILC5k25gnQqze+AjNUABGi9kih7M73XjIQoTUFKDwLf oZLWPOF3BQ5r4ujm2vQl9L1ABdSUYCNNUhFQfLkhslRqwo5eSHxPYuLnBBiWWYsn5Z 8nl7pGi6LDxh3BvPGNrIwmSS8csjdKOvc6kVlO98= Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by timber.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/1456) with ESMTP id u07GDD2I028730; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:13:14 -0500 Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:13:13 -0500 From: Chris Inacio To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwisXsXR5EDO3kax7y4Nt5xkxQALGW6AATOQP4AAMTSyAAALjnoAACMKDoAAEzQTwAATRP+AAAjXxHD//9QggA== Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 16:13:13 +0000 Message-ID: <2ABFCF79-B0C4-49E3-95C5-C580976DF2A2@cert.org> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.51.97] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3979EEDC58DE6547A4845F77AD8D4BE9@sei.cmu.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Cc: "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:13:24 -0000 DQpIYXZpbmcgd29ya2VkIG9uIElQRklYIGFuZCBpbXBsZW1lbnRlZCBpdCBhcyB3ZWxsIC0gSeKA mWQgYmUgcGVyZmVjdGx5IGhhcHB5IHRvIHdvcmsgaW4gdGhhdCBtb2RlbC4gIDopDQoNCg0KLS0N CkNocmlzIEluYWNpbw0KaW5hY2lvQGNlcnQub3JnDQoNCg0KDQo+IE9uIEphbiA3LCAyMDE2LCBh dCAxMDozOCBBTSwgUm9tYXNjYW51LCBEYW4gKERhbikgPGRyb21hc2NhQGF2YXlhLmNvbT4gd3Jv dGU6DQo+IA0KPiBIaSBEYW4sDQo+IA0KPiBTZWUgaW4tbGluZS4gDQo+IA0KPiBEYW5SDQo+IA0K Pj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4+IEZyb206IEhheW5lcywgRGFuIFttYWls dG86ZGhheW5lc0BtaXRyZS5vcmddDQo+PiBTZW50OiBUaHVyc2RheSwgSmFudWFyeSAwNywgMjAx NiA0OjM3IFBNDQo+PiBUbzogUm9tYXNjYW51LCBEYW4gKERhbik7IHNhY21AaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+ IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJFOiBbc2FjbV0gQ29uc2Vuc3VzIENhbGw6IENob29zaW5nIGFuIElNIEV4cHJl c3Npb24gU3ludGF4DQo+PiANCj4+IEhpIERhbiwNCj4+IA0KPj4gUmVnYXJkaW5nIHRoZSBJUEZJ WCBvcHRpb24sIEkgdGhpbmsgeW91IHdlcmUgcmVmZXJyaW5nIHRvIFJGQzcwMTINCj4+IChodHRw czovL3d3dy5yZmMtZWRpdG9yLm9yZy9yZmMvcmZjNzAxMi50eHQgKSBjb3JyZWN0Pw0KPj4gDQo+ IA0KPiBPZiBjb3Vyc2UgLSBzb3JyeSBmb3IgdGhlIGNvbmZ1c2lvbiwgdGhhbmtzIGZvciBjYXRj aGluZyBpdC4gDQo+IA0KPj4gSnVzdCB0byBjbGFyaWZ5LCBhcmUgeW91IGFkdm9jYXRpbmcgZm9y IGRlZmluaW5nIGEgc2V0IG9mIGZpZWxkcyB0aGF0IGFyZSByZXF1aXJlZA0KPj4gZm9yIFNBQ00n cyBJTSBlbGVtZW50cyBhbmQgdGhlbiBkZWZpbmluZyB0aGUgSU0gZWxlbWVudHMgaW4gdGVybXMg b2YNCj4+IHRob3NlIGZpZWxkcz8gIE9yLCBhcmUgeW91IG1vcmUgc3BlY2lmaWNhbGx5IHN1Z2dl c3RpbmcgdGhhdCB3ZSBzaG91bGQganVzdCB1c2UNCj4+IHRoZSBmaWVsZHMgbGlzdGVkIGluIHRo ZSBkb2N1bWVudCAobmFtZSwgZWxlbWVudElELCBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbiwgZGF0YXR5cGUsDQo+PiBl dGMuKT8NCj4+IA0KPiANCj4gSSB3YXMgdGhpbmtpbmcgZmlyc3Qgb2YgYWxsIGFib3V0IHRoZSBT eW50YXggLSB0aGF0J3Mgd2hhdCB0aGUgQ29uc2Vuc3VzIENhbGwgaXMgYWJvdXQuIA0KPiANCj4g TGV2ZXJhZ2luZyAgYWxyZWFkeSBkZWZpbmVkIGZpZWxkcywgbmFtaW5nIGNvbnZlbnRpb25zIG1h eSBiZSBhbiBleHRyYSBhZHZhbnRhZ2UgYnV0IG5vdCBlc3NlbnRpYWwgSU1PLiANCj4gDQo+PiBX aXRoIHRoYXQgc2FpZCwgSSB0aGluayB0aGlzIGZvcm1hdCBjb3VsZCB3b3JrIHdlbGwgZm9yIGRl ZmluaW5nIGF0dHJpYnV0ZXMgaW4NCj4+IFNBQ00gYW5kIGl0IHNlZW1zIHByZXR0eSBlYXN5IHRv IHdvcmsgd2l0aC4gIFdlIGNvdWxkIHByb2JhYmx5IGFsc28NCj4+IGxldmVyYWdlIG1hbnkgb2Yg dGhlaXIgbmFtaW5nIGNvbnZlbnRpb25zLCBldGMuIGFuZCBzYXZlIHNvbWUgbW9yZSB0aW1lDQo+ PiA6KS4gIEhvd2V2ZXIsIEkgZGlkIG5vdCBzZWUgYW55IGV4YW1wbGVzIG9mIGNvbXBvdW5kIElN IGVsZW1lbnRzIHRoYXQNCj4+IHdlcmUgbWFkZSB1cCBvZiBtdWx0aXBsZSBJTSBlbGVtZW50cyBk ZWZpbmVkIHVzaW5nIHRoaXMgZm9ybWF0LiAgQW4NCj4+IGV4YW1wbGUgZnJvbSBTQUNNIG1pZ2h0 IGJlIGEgbmV0d29yayBpbnRlcmZhY2UgdGhhdCBjb25zaXN0cyBvZiBhbiBJUA0KPj4gYWRkcmVz cywgTUFDIGFkZHJlc3MsIGZsYWdzLCBldGMuICBBcmUgdGhlcmUgYW55IGV4YW1wbGVzIG9mIHRo aXMgKEkgbWF5IGhhdmUNCj4+IGxvb2tlZCBpbiB0aGUgd3JvbmcgcGxhY2UpPyAgSXMgaXQgc29t ZXRoaW5nIHRoYXQgd2Ugd291bGQgaGF2ZSB0byBmaWd1cmUgb3V0DQo+PiBhbmQgZGVjaWRlIG9u PyAgT3IsIGlzIGl0IGp1c3Qgc29tZXRoaW5nIHRoYXQgaXMgYWRkcmVzc2VkIGF0IHRoZSBkYXRh IG1vZGVsDQo+PiBsZXZlbD8gIFRoYXQgaXMsIHRoZSBTQUNNIElNIHdpbGwgZGVmaW5lIHRoZSBh dHRyaWJ1dGVzLCBidXQsIHRoZSBkYXRhIG1vZGVscw0KPj4gYXJlIGZyZWUgdG8gY29tYmluZSB0 aGVtIGFzIHRoZXkgc2VlIGZpdCAoaS5lLiBhIGRhdGEgbW9kZWwgY291bGQgZGVjaWRlDQo+PiB3 aGV0aGVyIG9yIG5vdCB0aGV5IHdhbnRlZCB0byBjcmVhdGUgYSBuZXR3b3JrIGludGVyZmFjZSBj b25zdHJ1Y3QgdGhhdCB0aWVzDQo+PiB0b2dldGhlciBhIGJ1bmNoIG9mIGF0dHJpYnV0ZXMpLg0K Pj4gDQo+IA0KPiBJUEZJWCBoYXMgc2V2ZXJhbCBsZXZlbHMgb2YgY29tcGxleGl0eSB3aGljaCB3 ZXJlIGRldmVsb3BlZCBpbiBzdWNjZXNzaXZlIHBoYXNlcy4gVGhlcmUgaXMgbm8gRE0gYW5kIGlu aXRpYWxseSBkYXRhIHJlY29yZHMgd2VyZSBzZW50IGFzIGZsYXQgbGlzdHMuIFRoaXMgc3RhcnRl ZCBzb29uIHRvIGJlIHNlZW4gYXMgYSBsaW1pdGF0aW9uLCBhbmQgUkZDIDYzMTMgKGh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LnJmYy1lZGl0b3Iub3JnL3JmYy9yZmM2MzEzLnR4dCkgZGVmaW5lZCB0aGUgU3RydWN0dXJl ZCBEYXRhIElFcyB0byBkZWFsIHdpdGggdGhlIG1vcmUgY29tcGxleCBjYXNlcy4gKHNlZSBpbiBz ZWN0aW9uIDIuMyB0aGUgZXhhbXBsZSBvZiBhbiBJRFMgbWVudGlvbmVkIGFzIHVzZSBjYXNlKS4g DQo+IA0KPiBSZWdhcmRzLA0KPiANCj4gRGFuDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gc2FjbSBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gc2Fj bUBpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NhY20N Cj4gDQoNCg== From nobody Thu Jan 7 08:22:20 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E6E71A9078 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:22:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1udg5zHJkwHJ for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:22:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B98DF1A9041 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:22:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 08:22:16 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1452183736; bh=XXPgn/NpaSxDUdL5IL9uK6GVnRRS9ixPhYVgd0sp3hE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=mjipUXrP5A9mC9vUqe1ykjF/S9ab09O+gg/VpzbpS9yCR9INtbAEL1CQmO9tfNs8U 7UhfoqRCAxi+AZ4rDTnodj3ty86l+QFRZkf6gQS76HzXow+rmK59U/mDHV0xW+QGj0 Jo4+bKVj7eb/1YWf07Kof6429K4umQ5mb/ZxnqYU= From: stevensj To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_568e90b8ac45a_35a53f9ffc2432a06420b2"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: stevensj X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: sacm Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] is whether or not attributes were collected in an authenticated or unauthenticated manner metadata we care about? (#35) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:22:19 -0000 ----==_mimepart_568e90b8ac45a_35a53f9ffc2432a06420b2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agree. Good discussion and great point on the slippery slope related to varying quality levels of authenticated results - for example a limited privileges service account vs. root level permissions will differ in scan accuracy. However, if there is an opportunity provide a high level category or an ability to notate a greater trust to authenticated data in the event it is compared to a future unauthenticated result - ideally this could accommodate broader enterprise vulnerability programs. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/35#issuecomment-169714026 ----==_mimepart_568e90b8ac45a_35a53f9ffc2432a06420b2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Agree. Good discussion and great point on the slippery slope related to varying quality levels of authenticated results - for example a limited privileges service account vs. root level permissions will differ in scan accuracy. However, if there is an opportunity provide a high level category or an ability to notate a greater trust to authenticated data in the event it is compared to a future unauthenticated result - ideally this could accommodate broader enterprise vulnerability programs.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_568e90b8ac45a_35a53f9ffc2432a06420b2-- From nobody Thu Jan 7 11:11:49 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54A051ABD3E for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:11:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GRcj-lz-m3hf for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:11:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org [192.52.194.136]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 402CB1A001D for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:11:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 827FC6C0966; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:11:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (imshyb02.mitre.org [129.83.29.3]) by smtpvmsrv1.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7200C6C095F; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:11:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) by imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:11:45 -0500 Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.140.19.249) by imshyb02.MITRE.ORG (129.83.29.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:11:44 -0500 Received: from BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.255.212.24) by BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com (10.255.212.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.361.13; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 19:11:43 +0000 Received: from BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.212.24]) by BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.212.24]) with mapi id 15.01.0361.006; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 19:11:43 +0000 From: "Haynes, Dan" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Thread-Index: AdFCbwis7F3uSvyUuUaiDH4zlXZMhQAAnzmAATOQPoAAMTSzAAALjnoAACMKDYAAHgH/AAAGWPQgAARF6gAAACaGQA== Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 19:11:43 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dhaynes@mitre.org; x-originating-ip: [192.160.51.89] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BLUPR09MB104; 5:5cq0LGjQo4Xb+lgxQ2ceK8B1ay8UzETTban6+wW38ju/RD4wwbyZFKa+PJF5q7NfctSXCnZNlWArkRaw5LVQhGckkIx6HPvqo2OsZbx50WcETBycpGzFI88toaiFM9tlQ+2I77x0ggegyzXx3fZpUA==; 24:EGRzj8thhqYyi8pWO8GAuyLLyoM2wZFLtk6JSqrufpl5sDdJ3wht4gLeJL5uxKvLCFnc6Ma29cPbrH7n7H5yDjkdiEfzMfDVe8RytQsWSOQ= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 39b22161-124a-487d-42a8-08d31796613c x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046); SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; x-forefront-prvs: 0814A2C7A3 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(51914003)(377454003)(199003)(164054003)(13464003)(189002)(52604005)(107886002)(101416001)(76176999)(33656002)(10400500002)(5001960100002)(50986999)(189998001)(54356999)(19580405001)(86362001)(19580395003)(87936001)(11100500001)(93886004)(97736004)(81156007)(5001770100001)(5004730100002)(74316001)(2950100001)(6116002)(2900100001)(76576001)(122556002)(15975445007)(77096005)(1220700001)(102836003)(5008740100001)(586003)(1096002)(3846002)(92566002)(5003600100002)(2906002)(66066001)(5002640100001)(106356001)(105586002)(40100003)(99286002)(2501003)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BLUPR09MB104; H:BLUPR09MB104.namprd09.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: mitre.org does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 07 Jan 2016 19:11:43.1213 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: c620dc48-1d50-4952-8b39-df4d54d74d82 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLUPR09MB104 X-OriginatorOrg: mitre.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:11:48 -0000 Thanks for the additional information Dan. It was exactly what I was looki= ng for. Given that, my preferences are as follows: 1) Option 6 (IPFIX)=20 2) Option 1 or Option 2 3) Option 5 4) Option 3 or Option 4 Thanks, Danny -----Original Message----- From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:39 AM To: Haynes, Dan ; sacm@ietf.org Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax Hi Dan, See in-line.=20 DanR > -----Original Message----- > From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes@mitre.org] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012=20 > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt ) correct? >=20 Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it.=20 > Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields that=20 > are required for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM elements=20 > in terms of those fields? Or, are you more specifically suggesting=20 > that we should just use the fields listed in the document (name,=20 > elementID, description, datatype, etc.)? >=20 I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the Consensus Ca= ll is about.=20 Leveraging already defined fields, naming conventions may be an extra adva= ntage but not essential IMO.=20 =20 > With that said, I think this format could work well for defining=20 > attributes in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with. We could=20 > probably also leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and save=20 > some more time :). However, I did not see any examples of compound IM=20 > elements that were made up of multiple IM elements defined using this=20 > format. An example from SACM might be a network interface that=20 > consists of an IP address, MAC address, flags, etc. Are there any=20 > examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong place)? Is it=20 > something that we would have to figure out and decide on? Or, is it=20 > just something that is addressed at the data model level? That is,=20 > the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are free=20 > to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide=20 > whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct that t= ies together a bunch of attributes). >=20 IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in successive p= hases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent as flat lists. T= his started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC 6313 (https://www.rfc-= editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt) defined the Structured Data IEs to deal with th= e more complex cases. (see in section 2.3 the example of an IDS mentioned a= s use case).=20 Regards, Dan =20 From nobody Thu Jan 7 11:15:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 895BF1AC3B2 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:15:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B0NXgWQiJdfI for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:15:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14AB21ABD8F for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:15:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-x233.google.com with SMTP id z14so41106149igp.1 for ; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:15:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=zHi/veJ35tFHICgYnDcLcywQEUwgOT/4MUiRBOa3W1Q=; b=ArMt9Pjf3xX11kUyAdEUG62e6g6mQ1hkjKY/bW3k/s2fuMNObj3s6dRdzXSr7krvGu LoPyzOY0+9Wf9zY+Z62NffYcbh8IK0smM/RmQqcRNN5V/2nRk+ZjK5Bl2vzSKD1iWFda Pxl/TQR20ZTCXgLcJOpNBuPAhx4/vfjkknailDX3N4Q9AVnvLHeV6ZtlvjWJUPVoqXtZ OGUBZfCHKlKnSYnjy0Qk+6hu7flsLRpFFauMgW2rcJNVA8u2dCdL8vmuAaE6FkfoBnPV oUNW+O6FUFo78F7ZsT1vJU8hBafkCciwLBhJW8tl3xQLcOCTkuEWwIVCLWgxiTTUeRO3 LfXg== X-Received: by 10.50.30.166 with SMTP id t6mr17595913igh.15.1452194135437; Thu, 07 Jan 2016 11:15:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.170.74 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Jan 2016 11:15:15 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> From: Ira McDonald Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 14:15:15 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Haynes, Dan" , Ira McDonald Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc1254967bc60528c34b42 Archived-At: Cc: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" , "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 19:15:38 -0000 --047d7bdc1254967bc60528c34b42 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, OK - I'd like to change my vote. I like the IPFIX option best. Cheers, - Ira PS - The SUPA spec is well worth reading. Henk and Danny - recommended for a really good treatment of relationships between classes/objects. Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Haynes, Dan wrote: > Thanks for the additional information Dan. It was exactly what I was > looking for. > > Given that, my preferences are as follows: > > 1) Option 6 (IPFIX) > 2) Option 1 or Option 2 > 3) Option 5 > 4) Option 3 or Option 4 > > Thanks, > > Danny > > -----Original Message----- > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:39 AM > To: Haynes, Dan ; sacm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax > > Hi Dan, > > See in-line. > > DanR > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes@mitre.org] > > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM > > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012 > > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt ) correct? > > > > Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it. > > > Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields that > > are required for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM elements > > in terms of those fields? Or, are you more specifically suggesting > > that we should just use the fields listed in the document (name, > > elementID, description, datatype, etc.)? > > > > I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the Consensus > Call is about. > > Leveraging already defined fields, naming conventions may be an extra > advantage but not essential IMO. > > > With that said, I think this format could work well for defining > > attributes in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with. We could > > probably also leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and save > > some more time :). However, I did not see any examples of compound IM > > elements that were made up of multiple IM elements defined using this > > format. An example from SACM might be a network interface that > > consists of an IP address, MAC address, flags, etc. Are there any > > examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong place)? Is it > > something that we would have to figure out and decide on? Or, is it > > just something that is addressed at the data model level? That is, > > the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are free > > to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide > > whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct that > ties together a bunch of attributes). > > > > IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in successive > phases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent as flat lists. > This started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC 6313 ( > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt) defined the Structured Data > IEs to deal with the more complex cases. (see in section 2.3 the example of > an IDS mentioned as use case). > > Regards, > > Dan > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > --047d7bdc1254967bc60528c34b42 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

OK - I'd like to cha= nge my vote.

I like the IPFIX option best.

Cheers,
- Ira

PS - The= SUPA spec is=C2=A0well worth reading.=C2=A0 Henk and Danny - recommended f= or a really
good treatment of relationships between classes/objec= ts.


=
Ira McDonald (Musician= / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
C= hair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer W= orking Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
I= ETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High Nor= th Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroo= fmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/high= northinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter=C2=A0 579 Park Place=C2= =A0 Saline, MI=C2=A0 48176=C2=A0 734-944-0094
Summer=C2=A0 PO Box 221=C2= =A0 Grand Marais, MI 49839=C2=A0 906-494-2434


On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Haynes, Dan = <dhaynes@mitre.org> wrote:
Thanks for the additional information Dan.=C2=A0 It was exactly what I was= looking for.

Given that, my preferences are as follows:

1) Option 6 (IPFIX)
2) Option 1 or Option 2
3) Option 5
4) Option 3 or Option 4

Thanks,

Danny

-----Original Message-----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dr= omasca@avaya.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:39 AM
To: Haynes, Dan <dhaynes@mitre.org<= /a>>; sacm@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax

Hi Dan,

See in-line.

DanR

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes= @mitre.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.o= rg
> Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax >
> Hi Dan,
>
> Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012
> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt ) cor= rect?
>

Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it.

> Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields that<= br> > are required for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM eleme= nts
> in terms of those fields?=C2=A0 Or, are you more specifically suggesti= ng
> that we should just use the fields listed in the document (name,
> elementID, description, datatype, etc.)?
>

I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the Consensu= s Call is about.

Leveraging=C2=A0 already defined fields, naming conventions may be an extra= advantage but not essential IMO.

> With that said, I think this format could work well for defining
> attributes in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with.=C2=A0 We cou= ld
> probably also leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and save=
> some more time :).=C2=A0 However, I did not see any examples of compou= nd IM
> elements that were made up of multiple IM elements defined using this<= br> > format.=C2=A0 An example from SACM might be a network interface that > consists of an IP address, MAC address, flags, etc.=C2=A0 Are there an= y
> examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong place)?=C2=A0 Is it > something that we would have to figure out and decide on?=C2=A0 Or, is= it
> just something that is addressed at the data model level?=C2=A0 That i= s,
> the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are free<= br> > to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide
> whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct tha= t ties together a bunch of attributes).
>

IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in successive p= hases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent as flat lists. T= his started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC 6313 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt) defined the Structured Dat= a IEs to deal with the more complex cases. (see in section 2.3 the example = of an IDS mentioned as use case).

Regards,

Dan


_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

--047d7bdc1254967bc60528c34b42-- From nobody Fri Jan 8 13:37:52 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 172571B2BF4 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:37:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LOZSkPD2umxQ for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6742A1B2BF3 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:37:47 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id y66so342940775oig.0 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:37:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=iTKj4k6VKn1DyvFwPt1BcCMf+XPK+94UQR+rDwt9cR0=; b=OcaPW3QWJgmRQmGB52Ais/9pcsv06obVnhN0zCgUcbvaB4DU+JgWaJeusaSOfh9yrm pHyatQIQ02BPvfmQYHI1eVEf38/eiib8e6WSwN6xBkduPD3fnQY8A0wcu+799v0uP4n0 9mFDuh7JghWSiea561ONmGAGYWiutI2HvZq33gsJYAg9eGSapTBydIDn2WKF9skUdmj8 5PJ2Dr/tHRNlrEpo7Dd4kufnv5+/iNH5dAYW14jmEzI88Gm8Zzuc0HiI7p6wocgVr8D6 sz+TF0SwuSV/dDMtsSYXbcwtOUq9q/52bXUPTVgWZiGtgitqM2dDKdIZcJTKHQvH4Lcn GN9w== X-Received: by 10.202.178.135 with SMTP id b129mr73204387oif.86.1452289066692; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:37:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u8sm43981434obf.5.2016.01.08.13.37.44 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Jan 2016 13:37:45 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ABD53F39-019E-408D-9A14-808AE6132B68" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Adam Montville In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:37:43 -0600 Message-Id: <6E8DACAD-B0BD-4352-BBB6-43E8F5D6BE6F@gmail.com> References: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E7028C8@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> <5682E2EF.2040309@mnt.se> <57E69EB4-3F8C-4C5E-AC85-989FEDE84FDB@cert.org> <2D2622C5-72A4-4201-9BD2-54191FCB51BA@cert.org> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE031D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEE0903@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> To: Ira McDonald X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Cc: "Dan \(Dan\) Romascanu" , "Haynes, Dan" , "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 21:37:51 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_ABD53F39-019E-408D-9A14-808AE6132B68 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thanks to everyone for chiming in. After getting some additional = opinions on the IPFIX option and conferring with Karen, it seems that we = should move forward on the rough consensus to an IPFIX-based notation = coupled with English to expressing our IM. If there are issues down the = road with this selection, we can work through them at that point. Right now, we just need to choose and move on. Kind regards, Adam > On Jan 7, 2016, at 1:15 PM, Ira McDonald = wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > OK - I'd like to change my vote. >=20 > I like the IPFIX option best. >=20 > Cheers, > - Ira >=20 > PS - The SUPA spec is well worth reading. Henk and Danny - = recommended for a really > good treatment of relationships between classes/objects. >=20 >=20 > Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) > Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG > Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG > Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group > Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG > IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB > Blue Roof Music / High North Inc > http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic = > http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc = > mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com > Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 > Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Haynes, Dan > wrote: > Thanks for the additional information Dan. It was exactly what I was = looking for. >=20 > Given that, my preferences are as follows: >=20 > 1) Option 6 (IPFIX) > 2) Option 1 or Option 2 > 3) Option 5 > 4) Option 3 or Option 4 >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Danny >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com = ] > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:39 AM > To: Haynes, Dan >; = sacm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > See in-line. >=20 > DanR >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes@mitre.org = ] > > Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM > > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to RFC7012 > > (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt = ) correct? > > >=20 > Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it. >=20 > > Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields = that > > are required for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM = elements > > in terms of those fields? Or, are you more specifically suggesting > > that we should just use the fields listed in the document (name, > > elementID, description, datatype, etc.)? > > >=20 > I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the = Consensus Call is about. >=20 > Leveraging already defined fields, naming conventions may be an extra = advantage but not essential IMO. >=20 > > With that said, I think this format could work well for defining > > attributes in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with. We could > > probably also leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and = save > > some more time :). However, I did not see any examples of compound = IM > > elements that were made up of multiple IM elements defined using = this > > format. An example from SACM might be a network interface that > > consists of an IP address, MAC address, flags, etc. Are there any > > examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong place)? Is it > > something that we would have to figure out and decide on? Or, is it > > just something that is addressed at the data model level? That is, > > the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are = free > > to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide > > whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct = that ties together a bunch of attributes). > > >=20 > IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in = successive phases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent = as flat lists. This started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC = 6313 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt = ) defined the Structured = Data IEs to deal with the more complex cases. (see in section 2.3 the = example of an IDS mentioned as use case). >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Dan >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm = >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm --Apple-Mail=_ABD53F39-019E-408D-9A14-808AE6132B68 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Thanks to everyone for chiming in.  After getting some = additional opinions on the IPFIX option and conferring with Karen, it = seems that we should move forward on the rough consensus to an = IPFIX-based notation coupled with English to expressing our IM.  If = there are issues down the road with this selection, we can work through = them at that point.

Right now, we just need to choose and move on.

Kind regards,

Adam



On Jan 7, 2016, at 1:15 PM, Ira = McDonald <blueroofmusic@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

OK - I'd like to change my = vote.

I like = the IPFIX option best.

Cheers,
- Ira

PS - The SUPA spec is well worth = reading.  Henk and Danny - recommended for a really
good treatment of relationships between = classes/objects.


Ira McDonald = (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted = Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open = Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  = 48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  = Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434


On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:11 = PM, Haynes, Dan <dhaynes@mitre.org> wrote:
Thanks for the = additional information Dan.  It was exactly what I was looking = for.

Given that, my preferences are as follows:

1) Option 6 (IPFIX)
2) Option 1 or Option 2
3) Option 5
4) Option 3 or Option 4

Thanks,

Danny

-----Original Message-----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:39 AM
To: Haynes, Dan <dhaynes@mitre.org>; sacm@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression Syntax

Hi Dan,

See in-line.

DanR

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haynes, Dan [mailto:dhaynes@mitre.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [sacm] Consensus Call: Choosing an IM Expression = Syntax
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> Regarding the IPFIX option, I think you were referring to = RFC7012
> (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7012.txt ) correct?
>

Of course - sorry for the confusion, thanks for catching it.

> Just to clarify, are you advocating for defining a set of fields = that
> are required for SACM's IM elements and then defining the IM = elements
> in terms of those fields?  Or, are you more specifically = suggesting
> that we should just use the fields listed in the document (name,
> elementID, description, datatype, etc.)?
>

I was thinking first of all about the Syntax - that's what the Consensus = Call is about.

Leveraging  already defined fields, naming conventions may be an = extra advantage but not essential IMO.

> With that said, I think this format could work well for defining
> attributes in SACM and it seems pretty easy to work with.  We = could
> probably also leverage many of their naming conventions, etc. and = save
> some more time :).  However, I did not see any examples of = compound IM
> elements that were made up of multiple IM elements defined using = this
> format.  An example from SACM might be a network interface = that
> consists of an IP address, MAC address, flags, etc.  Are there = any
> examples of this (I may have looked in the wrong place)?  Is = it
> something that we would have to figure out and decide on?  Or, = is it
> just something that is addressed at the data model level?  = That is,
> the SACM IM will define the attributes, but, the data models are = free
> to combine them as they see fit (i.e. a data model could decide
> whether or not they wanted to create a network interface construct = that ties together a bunch of attributes).
>

IPFIX has several levels of complexity which were developed in = successive phases. There is no DM and initially data records were sent = as flat lists. This started soon to be seen as a limitation, and RFC = 6313 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6313.txt) defined the = Structured Data IEs to deal with the more complex cases. (see in section = 2.3 the example of an IDS mentioned as use case).

Regards,

Dan


_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

_______________________________________________
sacm = mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

= --Apple-Mail=_ABD53F39-019E-408D-9A14-808AE6132B68-- From nobody Mon Jan 11 13:58:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB951AC3B1 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JcaJ5Rfw8eBt for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x229.google.com (mail-ob0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EF1F1AC3B3 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-x229.google.com with SMTP id ba1so419681885obb.3 for ; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date :to:mime-version; bh=JNyvY2Z9nMG9HqL3cmfFKC7OtpkcfVdjeSeXQxGdhrs=; b=pohC76dgnv9FQMTTLOOqVF3MVo0M7We58JiVXfVM2grDdfvlJz1N5/jVugM+/l0ekp SEjdeJ/Ajqz9P5cAa7WQBXbr9ycifvQBVeCuY1+sdvV9PseL6bywWdxjchuz6vVGpOtf cj/CdqKUv6qalcXyzytWq1+oE//utVoeZKoUlc4PkKT6fg3ecnDKrUSixdAF9rkCv4/B aOB8cOUsSoFjHhTlvXmblTEqbp7wu7CelAYb0kSM4+T8Trv51SHqvjkAvj5j97XR+xwo PEzxgFS/DXbAkvqphWUhMnnEH02aOCpRnoC6u8Uaq1neXeJZWTSHn7q/d89pHmdKRK2e vVSg== X-Received: by 10.182.210.234 with SMTP id mx10mr94362923obc.47.1452549482697; Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f9sm46303790obw.13.2016.01.11.13.58.01 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:58:01 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:58:00 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] Soliciting Agenda Item Proposals for 2016-01-25 X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 21:58:04 -0000 Hi All: We have a virtual interim coming up on the 25th. I=E2=80=99m soliciting = topics for the meeting. If you have anything you=E2=80=99d like on the = agenda, let the chairs know. It=E2=80=99d be good to have the agenda = more or less final sometime next week. Kind regards, Adam= From nobody Fri Jan 15 06:02:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D44901B2D3A for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5OmR-c6rW_aD for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x22b.google.com (mail-oi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A9761B2D38 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id o124so126674693oia.3 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=OH9IQF3s/4/Ii50VUCy35msItXmw4AvHPX+TVnLadkE=; b=RcEOarWAYS67aNgthRiajpxlJFxNFtnOFhXS4YUzqZQoxtYoUFb4wgu1nCsxViqhrM w1Jksqh7gWU8WJIevz/sX228WURk4K83+bpVoWVQCRd9GDUhmcDBweOpoW0uM7jmrAF6 PkueEnM711hI0RusICrKJ46hazjUG4rIHHVEop91h1nvPL9A394jCG+tWgP31IGXRoJx SXZ6Ek4IT9O4EmxtVhrSbb6e6hDBB9s4ooIIaeFJv3HiKJctrfuOdiIGNLsvT0PqiA8W pRZS/3CLiJ9x2KBjXu+7ZaNPx/xCNnfSeL5zGVr/Ga8BeRUIukYRiFdtPwzWK/zK/QO7 N2/g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=OH9IQF3s/4/Ii50VUCy35msItXmw4AvHPX+TVnLadkE=; b=DwwFPO1gdvtF6Kp+1W/ojwvLw5ndqsZfyCylUi0C21hZS5k+ZbjXi7pbuob9n6Uwn2 BLxo928+arIERanaXzj77H2CaHHL1f3iT2No7Nv/nPFa246cj2xcnzHH33ikChidErRt VHjbib+RxPjTniAE0WKLAoNTaFeRfUjOzAAVPUO6UBiyss+EPTaeqih96TlWyRjUVbTX q4C8ek7oVXC5betBP9JphqR4l6vdKb3qR0LWPxTtuXz6yIFtdIPMrL5yXGLWMLyJlVvw mr4Fi8KcyZ+H421GI5rf1h+Bh4bhvdrzk/5fs7FcgTN73y+BEmZJPplWCWbYo4xDGiju Oo9g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkM414+kieXN0XdjJydlczP09RKDpcBNsuoFToDG/pwEzxEGfAq5iVdkXA3JBZfjpf6XhYHgH0tCh/UaDJIa/pnnwMl2g== X-Received: by 10.202.182.198 with SMTP id g189mr8186767oif.76.1452866528571; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id kg7sm6240421obb.27.2016.01.15.06.02.06 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:02:06 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9BE5BCD3-256E-4E70-A345-AD967167B485" Message-Id: <5294F0E9-5E6E-4DD1-856D-DEBC7F8DF03C@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 08:02:05 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] IETF SACM WG virtual interim meeting, 2016-01-25, 1700 UTC X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:02:14 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_9BE5BCD3-256E-4E70-A345-AD967167B485 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii The SACM working group will have a virtual interim meeting on Monday, = January 25 at 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST) for two hours. The agenda will include: - Open issues on requirements draft - Update on information model draft - Discussion on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario - TNC specification transitioning - Update on OVAL - Any other business The WebEx details are as follows: SACM January Virtual Interim Monday, January 25, 2016 12:00pm Eastern Standard Time (GMT-05:00), 2 hours Meeting Link: = https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=3Dm8666629096063f59e796da4a879a7727= = Meeting Number: 645 136 689 Meeting Password: bPmuNRfc Join by phone: 1-650-479-3208 (US/Canada) --Apple-Mail=_9BE5BCD3-256E-4E70-A345-AD967167B485 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii The SACM working group will have a virtual interim meeting on = Monday, January 25 at 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST) for two hours.

The agenda will = include:
- Open issues on requirements = draft
- Update on information model draft
- Discussion on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario
- TNC specification transitioning
- = Update on OVAL
- Any other business

The WebEx details are as = follows:

SACM = January Virtual Interim
Monday, January 25, = 2016
12:00pm Eastern Standard Time (GMT-05:00), 2 = hours

Meeting = Link: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=3Dm8666629096063f59e796d= a4a879a7727

Meeting Number: 645 136 689
Meeting = Password: bPmuNRfc

Join by phone: 1-650-479-3208 (US/Canada)


= --Apple-Mail=_9BE5BCD3-256E-4E70-A345-AD967167B485-- From nobody Fri Jan 15 09:51:46 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietf.org Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645611A912A; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:51:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: IESG Secretary To: "IETF Announcement List" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.12.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160115175142.20839.94080.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:51:42 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: sacm@ietf.org Subject: [sacm] SACM WG Virtual Interim Meeting, January 25, 2016, 1700 UTC X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 17:51:42 -0000 The Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (sacm) working group will have a virtual interim meeting on Monday, January 25 at 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST) for two hours. The agenda will include: - Open issues on requirements draft - Update on information model draft - Discussion on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario - TNC specification transitioning - Update on OVAL - Any other business The WebEx details are as follows: SACM January Virtual Interim Monday, January 25, 2016 12:00pm Eastern Standard Time (GMT-05:00), 2 hours Meeting Link: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=m8666629096063f59e796da4a879a7727 Meeting Number: 645 136 689 Meeting Password: bPmuNRfc Join by phone: 1-650-479-3208 (US/Canada) From nobody Mon Jan 18 15:25:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E50F31A1A4D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:24:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4o2tQmcrSCiC for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:24:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D37B1A1EF4 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:24:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:24:56 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453159496; bh=rPa34SV4kv2N48kW887eTz3O1CIbfbMbEpMytBMKQRU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=LInCpz3A4A/cw0yWPOx90XR2INNMIsYsK6bi5eTAIVca9j9fb/54pBUlggJHVuF4+ fL9yXhkFfdMuBzy0+j2lxpRNskaxSZjn4enwN/1xtAUNs46lvragDBA1yqx7yfNAjt Rx2yjy6IFs+/6z/K13LLOkVQUnxDE6uUUUQ2HtL0= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569d744883877_733a3fabb2b8f2c016969b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Update use case references (#66) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 23:25:00 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569d744883877_733a3fabb2b8f2c016969b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Updated in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/66#issuecomment-172680104 ----==_mimepart_569d744883877_733a3fabb2b8f2c016969b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Updated in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569d744883877_733a3fabb2b8f2c016969b-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 15:25:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E51F1A1BF2 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:25:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HsPQ1YfF_WfY for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:25:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0902D1A1A4D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:25:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:25:51 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453159551; bh=tdKMLnE5DltCZS/Fuc27l9W3aBrrudtjhfgzkT64MUU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=BMgyJPFwtl/Cjfbc7H2pN1fJiwywNOci5NinVPKYjyC5m8boZYszujdQtAVCWEkXw XDfV/ZrCXyWKm1mhGswFL3huERQQMyVw69Sm5F33NqWnp0rp7TIh1DcluIflUTItv0 rYHRbSTxPVjujbMjp8rFsouAHVH/k8eiOk1WUoZ4= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569d747f568c6_3ff43ff1571c12bc196760"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Requirements terminology reconciliation with Terminology draft (#67) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 23:25:53 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569d747f568c6_3ff43ff1571c12bc196760 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Henk and I will need to go through them....we did try to reconcile them prior to -11 but likely, it is a continuous process --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/67#issuecomment-172680304 ----==_mimepart_569d747f568c6_3ff43ff1571c12bc196760 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Henk and I will need to go through them....we did try to reconcile them prior to -11 but likely, it is a continuous process

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569d747f568c6_3ff43ff1571c12bc196760-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 17:01:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DEC41A86F5 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:01:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6eEtUtSIPH-T for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:01:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 643B11A86F1 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:01:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:01:03 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453165263; bh=H9rVKP/QGAvfQafkDzKoKEMRhnpfvd02zrqs2WCKfLI=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=foSS2fg12AUKuZPzlXhF2tF3HZpz211pdExq5dIMPTHBFvReT2EAz08Rt2qXAurjU XMabrp/0NB27Uo0GYclWQ23W3gAxdq4fplXpAGKjKgqsMv1rAfV8IrqzNLQMNL4cKO kwXEWH4cELzhSY5dRe7KWmJuAIVSXkIsR/EQSrUA= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569d8acfa24aa_4f2e3fa9b3a032b8381026"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Clarify push/pull and solicited/unsolicited in GM-011, IM-002, and DM-015 (#69) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:01:08 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569d8acfa24aa_4f2e3fa9b3a032b8381026 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Adam, You are right, there are inconsistencies. The clarification in that a "push" could come 'solicited' vs. 'unsolicited' came from the notion of a registered "update" request (in the case of 'solicited') vs. 'unsolicited' which could be a broadcast by the publisher. That said, I will remove "solicited" and "unsolicited" from the IM-002 description. Though I think the DM-015 still seems correct as a solicitation can be a request to provide the data now vs. update. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/69#issuecomment-172695568 ----==_mimepart_569d8acfa24aa_4f2e3fa9b3a032b8381026 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Adam,
You are right, there are inconsistencies. The clarification in that a "push" could come 'solicited' vs. 'unsolicited' came from the notion of a registered "update" request (in the case of 'solicited') vs. 'unsolicited' which could be a broadcast by the publisher. That said, I will remove "solicited" and "unsolicited" from the IM-002 description.

Though I think the DM-015 still seems correct as a solicitation can be a request to provide the data now vs. update.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569d8acfa24aa_4f2e3fa9b3a032b8381026-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 17:04:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C34171A8713 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:04:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x5LFpZ-eANAY for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:04:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DA351A870D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:04:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:04:04 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453165444; bh=Mlk540QPrKeMCOa96dSPs8vvyxDEgeSRTq05KgU7Edo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=UaBbcDXyCpm8EMGziOwKJ46nzJkL5xUXFGsJU6khOJaWlggOmWUy9CAIvdsfmz0SU typ5ccec6YI1FzN/UxaO84X4WOH159iL3L9sASbne6aF9/H+FgrZSmmzAK0rbXpvlg ZueC7TgM4Ramwld76ESQMH9HJLqGe8gJILk3WNWU= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569d8b845c70d_19ca3ff66e1bb29c6011da"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] What is the mechanism suggested by ARCH-008? (#70) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:04:06 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569d8b845c70d_19ca3ff66e1bb29c6011da Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Adam, I don't think we should be reinventing systems for timestamping; however, as SACM is creating an architecture to share information that is timestamped it needs to define how it can do so. It is up to the group to decide how time synchronization is to occur, NTP or otherwise....but that negotiation has to be allowed in the architecture. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/70#issuecomment-172695935 ----==_mimepart_569d8b845c70d_19ca3ff66e1bb29c6011da Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Adam,

I don't think we should be reinventing systems for timestamping; however, as SACM is creating an architecture to share information that is timestamped it needs to define how it can do so. It is up to the group to decide how time synchronization is to occur, NTP or otherwise....but that negotiation has to be allowed in the architecture.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569d8b845c70d_19ca3ff66e1bb29c6011da-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 17:05:12 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1140B1A8714 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:05:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uLMB5ck014kD for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:05:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C14621A86FC for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:05:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:05:09 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453165509; bh=zlavrIHt63D4E81usRcbuLE6i7QUyjMNs67Ml0k/WHg=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=we7RCSq6l+UuK2ngFJqMTJdg4g6N0GiXL99OO6ITlrRM3AGMzyU+j4ce/gOiZIRRJ nrkWiSk1YRFX7MQXrlH62MZvLFXteEPdS4xTfPCU0bySdhRtZSL/OLtdLML/54xqTE 2CRP6YUnmlAtLKQ4pLXbcgjLIogmvzVUCehh6GYQ= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569d8bc51d5a0_620e3fab321132b84081f7"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] DM-011 terminology suggestion (#71) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:05:11 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569d8bc51d5a0_620e3fab321132b84081f7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Noted! Revised in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/71#issuecomment-172696058 ----==_mimepart_569d8bc51d5a0_620e3fab321132b84081f7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Noted! Revised in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569d8bc51d5a0_620e3fab321132b84081f7-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 18:59:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18B71A8932 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:59:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qPxwKyVskv0R for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:59:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C5111A8925 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:59:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:59:36 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453172376; bh=YFx6sdYafcE7quG7+aS09onKcMo4S33XPjZ1UT6uE5g=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=NnNzTEsH+kQny9v6obwaz2A27ASv3JdAFJ4EvdJDvS+YcRHu0nhwlP1BLFshsVGfu lElnrnJof1RczzuN6Czi3M+7DXGbfeBSwP5RH1HID0s3KnXNmPisEVbAQwuzHMPaqY Wbe7Khh/358zZweKCGqCTAb3xeNQaKPrWq2i7vQs= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569da6988a2d3_1ee73fc527df12a086409c"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] OP-007 a nit s/their/its/ (#75) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:59:41 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569da6988a2d3_1ee73fc527df12a086409c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit done in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/75#issuecomment-172723456 ----==_mimepart_569da6988a2d3_1ee73fc527df12a086409c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

done in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569da6988a2d3_1ee73fc527df12a086409c-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 19:47:19 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34431A8A5A for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:47:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uoBvUq0r9w0D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:47:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC36F1A8A59 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:47:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:47:14 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453175234; bh=povkQFfMbmyGYfsoViLKrFdozWOyNY/f5v2zbm0emUI=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=iqSCfHcowTZrR0p8YQNdznKEW+LIxL8eqA+H0j2eh1he4h1IAunXwqhi7pnl/2ggg fDhsDiMjy4ng3Kax5/+m8+xjAubktzeIj65piyQbC8BAPkEv9L1bI52fhjvsbZAq0R SsKgf0QiqIIuhhECSq0JNLaCo9vEdiXDOAtkO4xU= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569db1c2d3e90_542c3fa048faf2bc1684fb"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] first sentence in the Introduction section (#78) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:47:17 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569db1c2d3e90_542c3fa048faf2bc1684fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dan, The intent was to reference the "threat information"....but given that SACM is focused on "posture information" (that leads to the potential of a threat) it does need to be revised. I will update as follows: Today's environment of rapidly-evolving security threats highlights the need to automate the sharing of security information (such as posture information) while protecting user information as well as the systems that store, process, and transmit this information. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/78#issuecomment-172729535 ----==_mimepart_569db1c2d3e90_542c3fa048faf2bc1684fb Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Dan,
The intent was to reference the "threat information"....but given that SACM is focused on "posture information" (that leads to the potential of a threat) it does need to be revised.
I will update as follows:
Today's environment of rapidly-evolving security threats highlights the need to automate the sharing of security information (such as posture information) while protecting user information as well as the systems that store, process, and transmit this information.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569db1c2d3e90_542c3fa048faf2bc1684fb-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 19:49:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D379C1A8A6A for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:49:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9iILrJgDd5pz for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:49:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DE011A8A65 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:49:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:49:11 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453175351; bh=1mM1dtibgMZlEpR3k/GQ2z4zy8J1uQ4c2rklwJ3niXQ=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TQEJXpuTn3LG3nhNHRfQDTCESF2YVJ1sSJ+GuirmoasbRW3C2/Ap2dzLT1HRHF7eu 13itOd0kSVUWh0TGKljdCHn5IfBCGo3DRvVmV2Qg+FJSoZWpsT9AmslBQzdpo40uLf cHg7Jk9EMH20898849bz/O3cvpb6vtgUbm5lfoew= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569db2375e80b_63793fdccc9d12bc96616"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] requirements related to IM (#79) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:49:14 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569db2375e80b_63793fdccc9d12bc96616 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Updated in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/79#issuecomment-172730079 ----==_mimepart_569db2375e80b_63793fdccc9d12bc96616 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Updated in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569db2375e80b_63793fdccc9d12bc96616-- From nobody Mon Jan 18 19:50:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A951A8A6C for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:50:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TZgSMVGRkfi7 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:50:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 909AA1A8A6D for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:50:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 19:50:06 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453175406; bh=CCyScyrU2T4DBJf3cXWYcUzX3LFTNMmbwTGUagfB4f4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=MSbk8dFvJ3jUYXF4YuHiZGgF30kDvaO401eg/10B/QDh4GSm0x3NxKYrjE2qaOmOV qh9wyUfY6enCRr+PVRH0nF2LAVNzIRQv3Iapf8im3viiI94S9hVks0wotgvBNPyfZP 7zs9nn1NdmPWHNYnxPUBCZ5M1fwyF9WFtRXQtxMQ= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569db26edf11d_3e563fef043612c09878"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] a 'many' too much (#80) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 03:50:08 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569db26edf11d_3e563fef043612c09878 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dan, That's a fair point, I will remove "many" in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/80#issuecomment-172730185 ----==_mimepart_569db26edf11d_3e563fef043612c09878 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Dan,
That's a fair point, I will remove "many" in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569db26edf11d_3e563fef043612c09878-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 13:40:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C511B36A9 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:40:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oO_tW9l2rhWE for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:40:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C7821B36B2 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:40:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:40:21 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453239621; bh=isglj68oaiCbZGzVYqhgTDfaPYLD4KZHHSdtcmQcCWo=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=BMYmZ9pm3SugY2pJra/n6NWSbasvkDDlGAizWtFaiTXyaYig8eNUQ7EKgcnhcRLlt 0BFrztferXrANU6fiYz+941Jm0NCyZfeeq36KvI4jBvj9yWPqZ+GPzeOXmHjtcZIPQ RB1w7VmfjjTJHt126fa9cc4H1ggCrn6lGoR0mg6w= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ead45855eb_73a73fbdbe78b2a0203955"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:40:38 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ead45855eb_73a73fbdbe78b2a0203955 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm not confident that there's consensus in either direction with respect to matching algorithms. If it doesn't need to be mentioned in this document, then where does treatment of the subject belong? Correctly matching endpoints between disparate implementations seems critical to the success of this effort. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-172995938 ----==_mimepart_569ead45855eb_73a73fbdbe78b2a0203955 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm not confident that there's consensus in either direction with respect to matching algorithms. If it doesn't need to be mentioned in this document, then where does treatment of the subject belong? Correctly matching endpoints between disparate implementations seems critical to the success of this effort.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ead45855eb_73a73fbdbe78b2a0203955-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:31:59 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2981B37C2 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:31:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aMafT5LvGAHx for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:31:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C0211B37C3 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:31:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:31:53 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453246313; bh=G3uNGAmKqHXGTCsKy05/XWEuHLbBymCFW02oejFsUHU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=OcK7qkOrPD43j/+UH1dd2u33XODBpZClEjR2d8Dot6m40dKbPyeZqsiPe+qMpjrhc wchiQa8dhNQ5WuK6x1CB0W7Y2RoCrKy9wyR58kIbmRzwVgBS8x4VFed4JnOWR1Snb6 7haYtum4W8l5r9H/JaGCII20asLhbVf2txvsAfYQ= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ec769ddd5c_4fc73f8a942e729c359336"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and proprietary (#81) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:31:57 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ec769ddd5c_4fc73f8a942e729c359336 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dan, The intent is to have SACM be extensible in 2 dimensions: 1. SACM should be able to adapt to future requirements whether it be to allow new standard transports, protocols or data models (or extending the information model). 2. SACM should allow for vendors to use their own extensions to the information model, protocols or data model (agreed that if they do, then they are not necessarily SACM compliant). I can see not forcing a requirement for the 2nd one, though there are quite a few standards that allow for vendor extensibility; for example, "vendor specified" attributes. Which is why I think we added the last clause (e.g. "proprietary"). Do you have a suggestion as to how to make that more clear? Would breaking it into the two separate bullets per the above help? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/81#issuecomment-173022735 ----==_mimepart_569ec769ddd5c_4fc73f8a942e729c359336 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Dan,
The intent is to have SACM be extensible in 2 dimensions:
1. SACM should be able to adapt to future requirements whether it be to allow new standard transports, protocols or data models (or extending the information model).
2. SACM should allow for vendors to use their own extensions to the information model, protocols or data model (agreed that if they do, then they are not necessarily SACM compliant).

I can see not forcing a requirement for the 2nd one, though there are quite a few standards that allow for vendor extensibility; for example, "vendor specified" attributes. Which is why I think we added the last clause (e.g. "proprietary").

Do you have a suggestion as to how to make that more clear? Would breaking it into the two separate bullets per the above help?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ec769ddd5c_4fc73f8a942e729c359336-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:38:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F8E31B37D6 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:38:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N_Xwwp7snT7a for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:38:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D99A91B37B4 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:38:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:38:29 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453246709; bh=goy1x2MwatKw5C67wHovAesjX3ohhqBRRAAp1QbMvUI=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ECv5u/moLehlGwMrBR7/L35HrAXYPVNErtqZWx05ou+6PhtFyQZXrQDEtKT5p/9CK q3gmS/TeYXhp1KwxSqpwAyqmX2tNexOuDIKSR7RH3wFYK32BA5Dcnr3ntMouF3kT75 h9pxk6LI1tKktLjqYtjMqoyFQklXjIw8LuABpcRc= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ec8f581d64_1f173ffa935052bc112447"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#82) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:38:32 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ec8f581d64_1f173ffa935052bc112447 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, By interfaces I meant programming interfaces which can be a protocol as well; that is, the means by which information is being communicated. So from that standpoint, G-012 is the expansion to "interfaces" in G-001. I can update it with a forward reference, so instead of "interfaces" it is "device interfaces (see G-012)"....OK? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/82#issuecomment-173024029 ----==_mimepart_569ec8f581d64_1f173ffa935052bc112447 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,
By interfaces I meant programming interfaces which can be a protocol as well; that is, the means by which information is being communicated. So from that standpoint, G-012 is the expansion to "interfaces" in G-001.

I can update it with a forward reference, so instead of "interfaces" it is "device interfaces (see G-012)"....OK?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ec8f581d64_1f173ffa935052bc112447-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:40:56 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975811B37E0 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:40:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KsPIL_NYWhVd for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:40:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F03071B37D1 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:40:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:40:52 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453246852; bh=sEfQvXGkf8zz3Xf5SiwbL8z27MaCPQQm6AGwuIx/LHY=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ijuN+gPnKFYA2viDO4kRtKno0v5It7YjddJnXShILixzA0/VGJtjSw8sejfnS22fr C/eRab0tfz6S9pCjkfvyjyXy+nyADvrJRYHzjKQLKG0DCKMd9zS7TQ3R3Qhb5F1yDh M0TyilmSHhL+l+r7AgLErECuWAWIGcsa56erDHS8= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ec9844b5d5_486f3f87f09672bc2687b8"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] title of G-004 (#84) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:40:54 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ec9844b5d5_486f3f87f09672bc2687b8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm OK with Versatility....will update in rev -012 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/84#issuecomment-173024458 ----==_mimepart_569ec9844b5d5_486f3f87f09672bc2687b8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I'm OK with Versatility....will update in rev -012

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ec9844b5d5_486f3f87f09672bc2687b8-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:41:46 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BB701B37DB for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:41:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MGrl0jfEP-dB for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:41:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B69CC1B37D8 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:41:43 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:41:43 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453246903; bh=RiGSchYU2qjKvAygbpONhjFr0tcgRRYr7MA2V18Ac4U=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=n4ai4Hd/imEMZg/BgFJ9PkJ4FxQPr7Cc/S2kqu0+4KroW0jKFG+fK4P/wTCK50phJ P+3Uiihu827TYMCQ7WSU5HMHEuVYGaJY+r7CDKHJyyWaRTorQgYwi6ZFvAtqudqULg 67dPNRhFJ4sOX3C+nym3CpJ8MIPp31QAPAhfsiNU= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ec9b7f6a7_39e93facffab32b81215cd"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-005: drop last sentence (#85) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:41:45 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ec9b7f6a7_39e93facffab32b81215cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Done in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/85#issuecomment-173024708 ----==_mimepart_569ec9b7f6a7_39e93facffab32b81215cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Done in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ec9b7f6a7_39e93facffab32b81215cd-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:42:34 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A20E11B37E2 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:42:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y4nIryySJzFx for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:42:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CD6A1B37E1 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:42:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:42:31 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453246951; bh=kcXOmkY59vRMdQjW5v+CMFuLyQj768bWDaAHZcQE37o=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=fjBtBv5a+E/Fn8UW5F21nlqAalR4IXMTYyVRR3eMwfRWto8qVZATFbOGdB/l+vA+M VTKfUL2jRO6sjo0DaoNM91yo2ZjrmGD2+Adcsb59dUC1fU6GqBdq6xiENNuz8hYcX9 K/UPcPiIlXFBGDdSSHM+daZ3YhV6ETRH6xTX8CBA= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ec9e7ce6e3_45813fa3906872c0155541"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-008 editorial (#86) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:42:33 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ec9e7ce6e3_45813fa3906872c0155541 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Done in version -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/86#issuecomment-173024958 ----==_mimepart_569ec9e7ce6e3_45813fa3906872c0155541 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Done in version -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ec9e7ce6e3_45813fa3906872c0155541-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:44:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD7E1B37E7 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:44:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iMpPgCPFdSVm for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:44:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B6531B37E6 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:44:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:44:35 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453247075; bh=BMGNmIJdo8Q0uj4kFGX4WBxpdtNHG3T0pN2maWw6hys=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=gah2eLDnBBOET7lVkjOPqas6uYWc26REWbv6rhEaCKKXBwRpA/754YzeJQvyt8Uyt 2hiR4Lez1lB+qU8P2Sd+0NtBkURcSOX0R6Wj9h7H96pNM/MSMP3UKh/2Jc2QwH2BPZ v80j6RNiCGCuIBWhi7v2g0wrD2qjrUXWcfyaEmjM= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569eca63cd627_18f13fe96a98f2b8361455"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-011: what 'standard'? (#87) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:44:37 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569eca63cd627_18f13fe96a98f2b8361455 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Done in revision -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/87#issuecomment-173025558 ----==_mimepart_569eca63cd627_18f13fe96a98f2b8361455 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Done in revision -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569eca63cd627_18f13fe96a98f2b8361455-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:45:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD9C1B37E0 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:45:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RtkHa6xeFVk3 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:45:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FC871B37F8 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:45:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:45:25 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453247125; bh=buzmX4MYRCA4O7RwXkD0HlTk0Um24fdw6jFt06fXfYs=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zuB/QP0wE+BKaeVXhJsrk4owB0vKYtIjzblwbTgJgskxnq3HNXpSb8vu+RoFG11KH ifizDkirKYvvMLM8k661DbjdsFNGc2nE+PZjaez6TSF6sKG2U/ahwa+86ScOmdh8mk XKM3Y0QdwJzpDSkFOtlEQnH4STS24O6Yfk9b2ZKc= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569eca95c1993_18f13fe96a98f2b8389225"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-012: drop editorial note (#88) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:45:31 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569eca95c1993_18f13fe96a98f2b8389225 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Done in revision -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/88#issuecomment-173025728 ----==_mimepart_569eca95c1993_18f13fe96a98f2b8389225 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Done in revision -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569eca95c1993_18f13fe96a98f2b8389225-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:53:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F76A1B37E7 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:53:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jRz509JKIS4C for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:53:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 175E61B37EB for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:53:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:52:59 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453247579; bh=Lg/Rbf5PjJmDs2wEk5OG/YRCmHbKcVEW0Kl71gI4s2M=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=VloAZB12hnNX1X453/zoQF94Lc4kWNTBd8XMV/lNO3fFmuRxYfxW8yw9HbdJKdLLB eAMDgDNGyHdcawH1hGLCEPXmPjivNAhu5v8R9LKSTOcSuil7DlRrxCqQx/UljT3xyi ikPwNMX2U+CMpyTwNK1SEm5wqKS5xYrnEDzRkKQQ= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ecc5b689c7_5c53f87f09672bc326426"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] IM-003: text clarifications (#90) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:53:01 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ecc5b689c7_5c53f87f09672bc326426 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for catching this Dan....will update per your suggested edit in revision -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/90#issuecomment-173027089 ----==_mimepart_569ecc5b689c7_5c53f87f09672bc326426 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks for catching this Dan....will update per your suggested edit in revision -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ecc5b689c7_5c53f87f09672bc326426-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:54:04 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 162201B37FC for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:54:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lk2-r_VLXMsm for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:54:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D646F1B37FB for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:54:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:54:01 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453247641; bh=H0xSQq2WoApDV5umLf3j+dQZSuRzAhtbHulT61McmEI=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=n9jsnnnoZdYcy+ZYUNOexgsJnVkCKCE+5mVTSftItTn15W8Yp+liY5KtB/p5+nWUm GNUOq/PaqjxXkkJRgglo7X63Nkeiyff7RASIXyOGV6YU9rEfR4xWJNAdlg0VqADhjK m9Srd3CDhtYDOaYDTbjYnIZKpiwOsxNbK9Y9vA/Y= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ecc9932dce_5453f87f09672bc484040"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] OP-003: incorrect capitalization (#91) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:54:03 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ecc9932dce_5453f87f09672bc484040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Update to come in rev -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/91#issuecomment-173027258 ----==_mimepart_569ecc9932dce_5453f87f09672bc484040 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Update to come in rev -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ecc9932dce_5453f87f09672bc484040-- From nobody Tue Jan 19 15:56:14 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933541B3803 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:56:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u9EiXyt6M1_D for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:56:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D5571B3800 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:56:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:56:11 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453247771; bh=Pih3ZvnfnsDuhqUge8/yLE4MgeB2q1KUHyyEwId1CB8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=f4ufsl1OrYFEsYlAD5GHnivLGZmMn+dJ+O7mGKZEiS/fVjoidTrfNAvO3QNlUnsYV ijG/ssf8q95uVShVxYt6FW3769x0PMjDoQIw47t3mHU0e/wvbrIdIuVxNE3r0vJ4ZA Dtyjh82kxfXR0+h9+QNHb4UloHVDF0N4DwBH91HU= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569ecd1baaa18_18fe3fe96a98f2b851394"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] T0003: MUST cannot be optional (#93) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 23:56:13 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569ecd1baaa18_18fe3fe96a98f2b851394 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Done in revision -12 --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/93#issuecomment-173027648 ----==_mimepart_569ecd1baaa18_18fe3fe96a98f2b851394 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Done in revision -12

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569ecd1baaa18_18fe3fe96a98f2b851394-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 04:38:58 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB2281A8777 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:38:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nyqEpnH7lFiA for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:38:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B38681A8765 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:38:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 04:38:53 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453293533; bh=BqHOcW1bsqA+MVxGA4Ihte5YBDA4kB5r1eR7saRY8ms=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=yRH7vzKDMqofwyEPOfE4RHhHTeyy+uzQMs8G6l/YkPrelnpxOl/hxqSREgFaYpayv KSr2mSkJTsOaQGKXOYNr0e+SEPv3NKdoodYLmTKNgkfaA/fJWTHTbb2SIv9BmV/dDk +uwkGqr3zlp/rwoKFQyfDXSBa35K3YUjbfjvWFhI= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569f7fddd3aca_4de33ff564f652b8161812d"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#82) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:38:56 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569f7fddd3aca_4de33ff564f652b8161812d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable OK with me. Thanks and Regards, Dan From: Nancy [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 1:38 AM To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Cc: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Subject: Re: [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#8= 2) Hi, By interfaces I meant programming interfaces which can be a protocol as w= ell; that is, the means by which information is being communicated. So fr= om that standpoint, G-012 is the expansion to "interfaces" in G-001. I can update it with a forward reference, so instead of "interfaces" it i= s "device interfaces (see G-012)"....OK? =E2=80=94 Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/82#issuecom= ment-173192336= ----==_mimepart_569f7fddd3aca_4de33ff564f652b8161812d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable OK with me.

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


From: Nancy [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 1:38 AM
To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements
Cc: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Subject: Re: [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#8= 2)


Hi,
By interfaces I meant programming interfaces which can be a protocol as w= ell; that is, the means by which information is being communicated. So fr= om that standpoint, G-012 is the expansion to "interfaces" in G= -001.

I can update it with a forward reference, so instead of "interfaces&= quot; it is "device interfaces (see G-012)"....OK?

=E2=80=94
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://urldefense.p= roofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps-3A__github.com_sacmwg_draft-2Dietf-2Dsacm-= 2Drequirements_issues_82-23issuecomment-2D173024029&d=3DBQMCaQ&c=3D= BFpWQw8bsuKpl1SgiZH64Q&r=3DI4dzGxR31OcNXCJfQzvlsiLQfucBXRucPvdrphpBsF= A&m=3DZYQHreSnZquNCiEHdovvp0n96BG4WXe4KGMtLYcKdGw&s=3DVbGG_3kA09U= SIRKHAJiqBDgd7KSj6M2KQzDg45NxVcI&e=3D>.

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view = it on GitHub.3D""

----==_mimepart_569f7fddd3aca_4de33ff564f652b8161812d-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 05:53:15 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 809FE1A8943 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:53:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lqwEkJSlVnB9 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:53:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E64291A8942 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:53:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 05:53:11 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453297991; bh=FkBB6e97HybA7RNFDtVAXq6VXx80daK/BU8CFHQT0H4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TIKMw1zFfyyMm/iRIPd1UslSXl5H3eJBSNHlqlKRmyLBHgNGlYT5qWuJvLr79D7IP zY3cQyhFBTpB8OvW+vnr0mgxQLVHJHs79oCpIVowsnF7ovKHNeIq3X4XsDnvyxeFUv r6x2BQKJ5c+GjGtX+trh5qMwZlRhybOPFj6gmhy4= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569f91477b516_46e83fa90288b2c035100d3"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Requirements terminology reconciliation with Terminology draft (#67) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:53:14 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569f91477b516_46e83fa90288b2c035100d3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit First update of the terminology draft addressing this issue can be found in the corresponding git, including examples of "SACM Task" that are highlighted in the req draft. Names of examples do not align smoothly with current definitions and copied examples might need some work, in general. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/67#issuecomment-173210638 ----==_mimepart_569f91477b516_46e83fa90288b2c035100d3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

First update of the terminology draft addressing this issue can be found in the corresponding git, including examples of "SACM Task" that are highlighted in the req draft. Names of examples do not align smoothly with current definitions and copied examples might need some work, in general.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569f91477b516_46e83fa90288b2c035100d3-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 06:06:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC991A897B for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 06:05:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b0BSnFiQtstw for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 06:05:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 233CD1A8979 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 06:05:57 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 06:05:46 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453298756; bh=S+Ah1aV1/G5RyAcRyu/rSvxJ7rzS7z30879BoNx7thM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=trumUNQ2IQrhUx9UCkWQRj6fKevN+EaeS13eawpTDmdxnIkCZSeIjB+wzX9bktYUo 7BB8lrQyUUEhgSsPbaGFEBWDPXYg6nvhSV7SstJ7gTjgo2YW0Ybn8ihy6mFqqBDk50 WtN4oIiZuAeRSaWSUI8GXuw0/br/7nXjM1FBj5CE= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569f943a9c3ce_37da3ff8a70d129c13295b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#82) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 14:05:59 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569f943a9c3ce_37da3ff8a70d129c13295b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Maybe the name of G-012 is also a little bit confusing? It might be just me, but "G-012 Device Interface" does not sound like a programming interface or protocol. The architecture draft states that SACM components have SACM interfaces for communication between SACM components. SACM (component) interfaces? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/82#issuecomment-173213398 ----==_mimepart_569f943a9c3ce_37da3ff8a70d129c13295b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Maybe the name of G-012 is also a little bit confusing? It might be just me, but "G-012 Device Interface" does not sound like a programming interface or protocol.

The architecture draft states that SACM components have SACM interfaces for communication between SACM components.

SACM (component) interfaces?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569f943a9c3ce_37da3ff8a70d129c13295b-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 09:44:36 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61DF01ABD8F for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:44:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KHSbd3jVpLG5 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:44:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x230.google.com (mail-oi0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE1A61A92F8 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:38:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x230.google.com with SMTP id k206so10028334oia.1 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:38:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:references :to:in-reply-to; bh=WHKmqsRtCTsG0A+hBa9Hw02p23wM5pRuiUwwwEFYdLA=; b=qcXwDJJM8eVjrIXGjYkq7I1y81MgZ6eZUp0onGPS24fHd7VoOBKbppGGANWYtekHXt k769io8uMQ7i1D7gmyZ4pSCpnz5WFntO7IJteHGCzZ2777fVOH5CycM8ApJVxmirCpbX mzcFvfipHccvueRe90MkePfkV+Dr0SUhz2GH98xC2SkBISCV/4IbvRLEKiySD5sBs9V3 VYo38vTljdfflkyous/YAZ68jPAiSOlZZjqQh2BZ7DJBFgDGz6x+ruEYv8r5eaCps4ob eFbNU1eK3bsIcVpRiWo8NzkQ97PGlbV1R34iNTkV1Uk4HIc474HcWo53pi0XqPfXLTKt F4sQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:message-id:mime-version :subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to; bh=WHKmqsRtCTsG0A+hBa9Hw02p23wM5pRuiUwwwEFYdLA=; b=bzc6tgoDrUM2pv/VKjXL4rBQIbO+T5cYPWK/SRKkO1p9Q6qi8L9TKXFQBmBRZ4ZYnb klffBEyBRo1d01bKO7oGyrz//kZnt3yNBtGln4T0QMyYgmDlGGeOzARM34glkpQ5PLcQ aBGgdPwfXSE1kRSvzIQ5nmRFIlSpth2W9bl1pev8wUGTyvY8xwEAz+vYqJwnFNXEBj3F b2pk6xfZeyYDN+Bu10YXgPyeecfeannXWy6jJz8PVFFtgFLfq9qOROuiKtp+f9JXEHuR mWm4eyyRHx9l3MMdIgunbAqVen2a4DEp5yNA9PbD0+G6gcqsOYsJmFDK0eZ6iXVbAWA8 MajQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkhvHvUusZs4v0P/b8Kb8KfsFg0ZHp0rBmS8mGorswU3+1nmud7b/jQHdFcxObjYLneoESQZcBEyrjjaujj2u8G+TR8Qw== X-Received: by 10.202.1.18 with SMTP id 18mr28703534oib.100.1453311508121; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:38:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gi5sm18711133obb.6.2016.01.20.09.38.26 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:38:27 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A9827F88-E61A-4F47-AC08-3C4F27880830" Message-Id: <6EAA6FA0-0BAF-45E7-9879-A62230B52C54@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:38:26 -0600 References: <5294F0E9-5E6E-4DD1-856D-DEBC7F8DF03C@gmail.com> To: "" In-Reply-To: <5294F0E9-5E6E-4DD1-856D-DEBC7F8DF03C@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] IETF SACM WG virtual interim meeting, 2016-01-25, 1700 UTC X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 17:44:35 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_A9827F88-E61A-4F47-AC08-3C4F27880830 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Here are proposed time allocations for the virtual interim meeting: - WG Status -- Chairs (5m) - Open issues on requirements draft -- Lisa (20m) - Update on information model draft -- Danny (15m) - Discussion on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario -- Danny (20m) - TNC specification transitioning -- Jess (20m) - Update on OVAL -- Danny (35-40m) - Way forward -- Chairs (5m) REMINDER: We need two takers of note=E2=80=A6 If you=E2=80=99re = planning to attend, and willing to take some notes, please let the = chairs know before the meeting. Kind regards, Adam > On Jan 15, 2016, at 8:02 AM, Adam Montville = wrote: >=20 > The SACM working group will have a virtual interim meeting on Monday, = January 25 at 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST) for two hours. >=20 > The agenda will include: > - Open issues on requirements draft > - Update on information model draft > - Discussion on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario > - TNC specification transitioning > - Update on OVAL > - Any other business >=20 > The WebEx details are as follows: >=20 > SACM January Virtual Interim > Monday, January 25, 2016 > 12:00pm Eastern Standard Time (GMT-05:00), 2 hours >=20 > Meeting Link: = https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=3Dm8666629096063f59e796da4a879a7727= = >=20 > Meeting Number: 645 136 689 > Meeting Password: bPmuNRfc >=20 > Join by phone: 1-650-479-3208 (US/Canada) >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_A9827F88-E61A-4F47-AC08-3C4F27880830 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Here are proposed time allocations for the = virtual interim meeting:

- WG Status -- Chairs (5m)
- Open issues = on requirements draft -- Lisa (20m)
- Update on = information model draft -- Danny (15m)
- Discussion = on draft-coffin-vuln-scenario -- Danny (20m)
- TNC = specification transitioning -- Jess (20m)
- Update = on OVAL -- Danny (35-40m)
- Way forward -- Chairs = (5m)

REMINDER: = We need two takers of note=E2=80=A6  If you=E2=80=99re planning to = attend, and willing to take some notes, please let the chairs know = before the meeting.

Kind regards,

Adam


On = Jan 15, 2016, at 8:02 AM, Adam Montville <adam.w.montville@gmail.com> wrote:

The SACM = working group will have a virtual interim meeting on Monday, January 25 = at 17:00 UTC (12:00 EST) for two hours.

The agenda will include:
- Open issues on requirements draft
- = Update on information model draft
- Discussion on = draft-coffin-vuln-scenario
- TNC specification = transitioning
- Update on OVAL
-= Any other business

The WebEx details are as follows:

SACM January Virtual Interim
Monday, January 25, 2016
12:00pm Eastern = Standard Time (GMT-05:00), 2 hours

Meeting Link: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/j.php?MTID=3Dm8666629096063f59e796d= a4a879a7727

Meeting Number: 645 136 689
Meeting = Password: bPmuNRfc

Join by phone: 1-650-479-3208 (US/Canada)



= --Apple-Mail=_A9827F88-E61A-4F47-AC08-3C4F27880830-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 11:30:41 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FBBB1ACD8B for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:30:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ly1KPtblpf5Z for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:30:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65FFF1ACDBE for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:30:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 11:30:37 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453318237; bh=MFq73ADZ5m8IJNy5C5sG3qXDbGVDlo+qgr17xjxsgIw=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=wax2nErVMsm6THlu/vSk0jDnncCLUGvDVnbZzCM5scL3E5imamW+e+6yH3VMTt0iM THgrDOEPnasLhOWLcHe405ROHgmNh30n5daB0vFmWlix6Y2KiZr0lJLDynZ+i6Ol0P h8pbAZTvMVN0IwRfPYbcoDvUme8qhpT4eJ2ntfA8= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_569fe05d8ab60_21c03fcbfd9b52b834102e"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:30:40 -0000 ----==_mimepart_569fe05d8ab60_21c03fcbfd9b52b834102e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I can potentially see the need for SACM to "name" the data models.....and agree with Jim that SACM needs to have a good IM (and DM) so that the SACM components can discern on the information afforded (by the DM). That said, I still do not see how "algorithm" comes into play....but rather SACM has a well understood information model from which SACM components can extract what they are looking for. Where I see the "naming" of DM's comes from the group understanding that there may be different DM's in use (but they all have to map to the IM if they are to be SACM compliant)......we have requirements to allow for discovery of this, which I guess implies we are labeling the DMs. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-173333717 ----==_mimepart_569fe05d8ab60_21c03fcbfd9b52b834102e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I can potentially see the need for SACM to "name" the data models.....and agree with Jim that SACM needs to have a good IM (and DM) so that the SACM components can discern on the information afforded (by the DM). That said, I still do not see how "algorithm" comes into play....but rather SACM has a well understood information model from which SACM components can extract what they are looking for. Where I see the "naming" of DM's comes from the group understanding that there may be different DM's in use (but they all have to map to the IM if they are to be SACM compliant)......we have requirements to allow for discovery of this, which I guess implies we are labeling the DMs.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_569fe05d8ab60_21c03fcbfd9b52b834102e-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 15:13:09 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 025D41B2A6C for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:13:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.596 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.596 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.404, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dx4VacNIaG26 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:13:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D98C1B2A6A for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:13:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:13:04 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453331584; bh=2mZSoldkGMw5sjjfvBQ5ve+wyFyo7Tj5JaG01lDno5E=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=jye4SF19WiBI0sN0/Q+nkmSwLukKjbmabqURp80q22dJ6UkzGKS95e4B0hyi08hjU PKarrpR0ayOScFGUaqoZUscWwF7X6XJOCexfxP5QF4k/HXpHxCZn/nBd61fgWtOg1+ /5AV+XCTkbzJot62mSU/z5e4HjB+zJtrbAP9Alaw= From: Jim Schaad To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a01480876a3_54723fb7c96612bc213028"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:13:09 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a01480876a3_54723fb7c96612bc213028 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So IM-004 says that DMs have to be identifiable. That should address that need. Adam, I am unsure of what the problem is you are describing.is. Are you saying that Vendor A and Vendor B are going to assign different asset identifier to the same asset and that without some type of help it will be impossible to know that they are the same assets? I have much larger worries that this, are they using the same DMs and is there a converter between the two models in the system. Based on what I expect to see, it should be easy to enumerate all of the ids assigned by Vendor A and all of them assigned by Vendor B. The trick is then to try and figure out if the assets ids refer to the same item. This will depend on the traits of the two assets. If the vendors do not populate their view of the asset with enough data for the matching to work, then you are going to be out of luck. This is a function of the IM model being sufficiently complete in describing each of the different assets classes and specifying the correct set of minimal items. This is an IM problem and not a requirements problem. If the IM has an asset ID field, and it is filled in differently by the two different vendors then there is a different problem. The IM, and thus the matching algorithm, would need to make statements about the uniqueness of a value for a specific asset. But again these are statements about the IM/DM and not the matching algorithm. Clarifications would be appreciated. I also do not understand why the TLS reference makes any sense here. When looking at it I would call this the definition of a field in the IM about a specific attribute. Again not related to a matching algorithm. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-173395295 ----==_mimepart_56a01480876a3_54723fb7c96612bc213028 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

So IM-004 says that DMs have to be identifiable. That should address that need.

Adam, I am unsure of what the problem is you are describing.is. Are you saying that Vendor A and Vendor B are going to assign different asset identifier to the same asset and that without some type of help it will be impossible to know that they are the same assets?

I have much larger worries that this, are they using the same DMs and is there a converter between the two models in the system. Based on what I expect to see, it should be easy to enumerate all of the ids assigned by Vendor A and all of them assigned by Vendor B. The trick is then to try and figure out if the assets ids refer to the same item. This will depend on the traits of the two assets. If the vendors do not populate their view of the asset with enough data for the matching to work, then you are going to be out of luck. This is a function of the IM model being sufficiently complete in describing each of the different assets classes and specifying the correct set of minimal items. This is an IM problem and not a requirements problem.

If the IM has an asset ID field, and it is filled in differently by the two different vendors then there is a different problem. The IM, and thus the matching algorithm, would need to make statements about the uniqueness of a value for a specific asset. But again these are statements about the IM/DM and not the matching algorithm.

Clarifications would be appreciated. I also do not understand why the TLS reference makes any sense here. When looking at it I would call this the definition of a field in the IM about a specific attribute. Again not related to a matching algorithm.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a01480876a3_54723fb7c96612bc213028-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 19:46:30 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 549691B2E13 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:46:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cY9pJdi0XGE8 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:46:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAA961B2E10 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:46:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:46:25 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453347985; bh=bfJYWUVuYrcPA59+owDmDWVS7XaMiFr8FBZUOQUxcr8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=o+yWYGZIL1vWVJy0lrU94t5W4JNEi7ac3CHjxf+tokMYCKeyCo0ZeNawkVkhaTZrO e/XQdiLzKr7wKI1u3JKXMY7APNOBILei95ZkUku6kXuDPz4hI9jFtu/GNpHJAxNoui 22tLeX+OBYdmKY+ZUzgJw0e9jB3WHuGnfEDB2X30= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a05491b2011_5c1d3f8e02e032b8109676b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Updates for revision -12 (#95) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 03:46:28 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a05491b2011_5c1d3f8e02e032b8109676b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Revision 12 addresses issues through Jan 18. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95 -- Commit Summary -- * Merge remote-tracking branch 'sacmwg/master' * Merge branch 'sacmwg/master' * revision 12 updates * Merge pull request #1 from ncamwing/revision12 -- File Changes -- M draft-ietf-sacm-requirements.xml (56) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95.patch https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95 ----==_mimepart_56a05491b2011_5c1d3f8e02e032b8109676b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Revision 12 addresses issues through Jan 18.

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95

Commit Summary

  • Merge remote-tracking branch 'sacmwg/master'
  • Merge branch 'sacmwg/master'
  • revision 12 updates
  • Merge pull request #1 from ncamwing/revision12

File Changes

Patch Links:

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a05491b2011_5c1d3f8e02e032b8109676b-- From nobody Wed Jan 20 19:48:20 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AFA31B2E15 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:48:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6_YyGFnRyBgC for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:48:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6F591B2E13 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:48:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:48:17 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453348097; bh=vEMvmEt71xhxAnSKCEi6VmIPhDW9jxQOWCXUKP5S1KA=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=o8OhvdB/UnGYZsq+JM1jORDstnpd1vTOzs0l4C4bHg7Z29IX2fj/tKsYHbUxsyF+X 2TWr5uye7tEP1KKAvzQjSuQ7My2PMyfxlmtEuwDgJdNhbX+9qZizJuHpR6qrC29KLS XZsjwR31HhbOaGU4QKAIyl9JBDuUWAQjmEzTSDnQ= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a055014563f_611e3fd375a912c02096637"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Updates for revision -12 (#95) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 03:48:19 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a055014563f_611e3fd375a912c02096637 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Merged #95. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/95#event-521228729 ----==_mimepart_56a055014563f_611e3fd375a912c02096637 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Merged #95.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a055014563f_611e3fd375a912c02096637-- From nobody Thu Jan 21 12:37:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E58F1A910E for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:37:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pWjbhAVQhgxi for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:37:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD4851A9109 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:37:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:37:30 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453408650; bh=cBRitsmtsMhgyRvpbODcgrF19Ls3E6kwvwO3OSvTMa4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=KlTkzDwKXS2ClqK/S5a7om3EnsK5UgGs7dZfJ29wM5JdmTJd5g/fMtteO6lvKPKWX Fp8pDyQVmxbiFgzpdFSJ6WCNLC7AhcJVHTHRHrEGjPtI6+5OV8Jh7PKHE+M8HWLWHQ UBl8hYE3oy0duCBXvs+gYkar/g8k4kl1kbPwotwA= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a1418a789de_2f3f3fcc6686929c9971e6"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 20:37:33 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a1418a789de_2f3f3fcc6686929c9971e6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Maybe I'm not taking in the view from the proper perspective. Maybe "algorithm" is not the right word either. As you mention, the trick is to figure out whether two distinct identifiers reference the same item - a "same as" relationship. If conditions for establishing this "same as" relationship must exist solely in the IM, and if these conditions are already known to be required, then my concern is satisfied. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-173700805 ----==_mimepart_56a1418a789de_2f3f3fcc6686929c9971e6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Maybe I'm not taking in the view from the proper perspective. Maybe "algorithm" is not the right word either. As you mention, the trick is to figure out whether two distinct identifiers reference the same item - a "same as" relationship. If conditions for establishing this "same as" relationship must exist solely in the IM, and if these conditions are already known to be required, then my concern is satisfied.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a1418a789de_2f3f3fcc6686929c9971e6-- From nobody Fri Jan 22 15:50:16 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADD4C1B2D20 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:50:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id poayABbrw-Qb for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext8.iad.github.net [192.30.252.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D76551B2D18 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:50:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:50:11 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453506611; bh=Cwa21RHwhEIIQaYhFEzoYaprgjQWdofP8qK90Iu5eUE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=zWXNO3RTAGHCARy668nu6Ayvrxq176mlF8z/ptWqMgTDR5K5yRd94ajBDqM3ESn0z niHFkBEOMjMUyGS3Zpgx4ZJ01IE160Tc5v+rVPOruyJAHWKKEXsL//1AZBUIo5DwvW AICpAHkUK3kgXOJdRo5yZuHH8KmIRm1j9BsdHDUs= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a2c033dfdac_74bd3fa1a477f29c822e5"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Revision12 (#96) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 23:50:15 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a2c033dfdac_74bd3fa1a477f29c822e5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Per Dan=E2=80=99s request, adding clarification on G-001 You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/96 -- Commit Summary -- * Merge remote-tracking branch 'sacmwg/master' into revision12 * G-001 update -- File Changes -- M draft-ietf-sacm-requirements.xml (4) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/96.patch https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/96.diff --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/96 ----==_mimepart_56a2c033dfdac_74bd3fa1a477f29c822e5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Per Dan=E2=80=99s request, adding clarification on G-001

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/p= ull/96

Commit Summary

  • Merge remote-tracking branch 'sacmwg/master' into revision1= 2
  • G-001 update

File Changes

Patch Links:

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.=3D""

----==_mimepart_56a2c033dfdac_74bd3fa1a477f29c822e5-- From nobody Fri Jan 22 15:52:20 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D33E1B2D31 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:52:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EyFA-43vkg9x for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:52:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F6041B2D33 for ; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:52:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:52:14 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453506734; bh=A9kKSEBqJ8fihVae8Pguey71X+zMnTwQHic7qgjMAeE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=k6idvj050rif0in0ze85+F5pokSszD/8lufxfMK4OIY3GSx083tjR3AU2d8b/1HnX WXsDukyV6TQGuTedYfsYopib8KoJK9jo1FUzQ55//jULPaSj9RLUrAyusFYrtYaHDV 1+hn2nJ7bjhgfdGh+NqpbwQ8aTTgarqHluCWDpmU= From: Nancy To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a2c0ae7fdda_270c3fd0afb592c02866e8"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: ncamwing X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Revision12 (#96) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 23:52:18 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a2c0ae7fdda_270c3fd0afb592c02866e8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Merged #96. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/pull/96#event-523587095 ----==_mimepart_56a2c0ae7fdda_270c3fd0afb592c02866e8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Merged #96.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a2c0ae7fdda_270c3fd0afb592c02866e8-- From nobody Fri Jan 22 16:05:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietf.org Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D736D1A888C; Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:04:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160123000459.20587.53210.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:04:59 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: sacm@ietf.org Subject: [sacm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sacm-requirements-12.txt X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 00:05:00 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring Working Group of the IETF. Title : Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) Requirements Authors : Nancy Cam-Winget Lisa Lorenzin Filename : draft-ietf-sacm-requirements-12.txt Pages : 19 Date : 2016-01-22 Abstract: This document defines the scope and set of requirements for the Secure Automation and Continuous Monitoring (SACM) architecture, data model and transport protocols. The requirements and scope are based on the agreed upon use cases. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements-12 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-sacm-requirements-12 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Jan 25 08:48:55 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15E31B2D27 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:48:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.508 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.508 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FxXTCmqwBat4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22AF91A1B51 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:48:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:48:45 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453740525; bh=BSg9sk12o9iCZXEmvrSR8OmBzODT9YUyGE22LhFbsC8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=yUix+SxFcZm2di5sw2RW+/+E6Lal900dcWnqn5Thi2SzgUxMB4tM2IXxuul8OmEm8 QaCcxETSwvjUlyFoq8Dltz7MvVsTskYxvhZfnsY+yWo1SvHRr6gldm7ZvoKmkWRuMk sAdsYSBuCI5YQhP2dpziXEVrs4mPo+ua/rJ9DK14= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a651ede5eb_7993fc4aeeeb29c30103a"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Data Origin (#26) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:48:54 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a651ede5eb_7993fc4aeeeb29c30103a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Quote: "One or more properties that enable a SACM component to identify the SACM component that initially acquired or produced data about a (target) endpoint (e.g. via collection from a data source)." There might be a too strong focus on the SACM Task "Information Collection"/"Collection" here. What about SACM content that is not initially acquired or produced by a target endpoint, e.g. "assessment"/"evaluation result"? This issue is related to Issue https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/17 "Processed Attributes". --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/26 ----==_mimepart_56a651ede5eb_7993fc4aeeeb29c30103a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Quote: "One or more properties that enable a SACM component to identify the SACM component that initially acquired or produced data about a (target) endpoint (e.g. via collection from a data source)."

There might be a too strong focus on the SACM Task "Information Collection"/"Collection" here. What about SACM content that is not initially acquired or produced by a target endpoint, e.g. "assessment"/"evaluation result"?

This issue is related to Issue #17 "Processed Attributes".

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a651ede5eb_7993fc4aeeeb29c30103a-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 08:50:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB5C31B2CDD for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:50:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kknSXd22_cFX for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:50:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55E701A1A99 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:50:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:50:02 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453740602; bh=w1eqT3aXVdpOa06vmdWLrFuthf7xKf6q73G5xN3iacM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=HPQbc/U6ownx9z4A00D1WVcqXRjiVlRf+2QW7h5nyRIEg2iw5HrNteV3CcGcwYrTn tyslEOEWPdocUoIZotBecSsrS9nROonXsj3rW74bFQwebOS718tlv0qOBlkgBy2dG5 Ii+Y+sUgmzD7XuzfjfRnG+P6hpg6iZzCGmMnEi+Y= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6523aa12e3_39ae3fa7f3aeb2a03209b1"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] SACM Tasks (#27) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:50:05 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6523aa12e3_39ae3fa7f3aeb2a03209b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The terminology draft includes definitions of the terms "Collection Task" and "Evaluation Task". The definition of SACM Task includes definitions of "Information Collection" and "Endpoint Assessment", which originate from the requirement draft. Are those definition about the same thing? If so, in order to be merged properly, the task names have to be homogenized and the definitions must not conflict. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/27 ----==_mimepart_56a6523aa12e3_39ae3fa7f3aeb2a03209b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The terminology draft includes definitions of the terms "Collection Task" and "Evaluation Task".
The definition of SACM Task includes definitions of "Information Collection" and "Endpoint Assessment", which originate from the requirement draft.

Are those definition about the same thing? If so, in order to be merged properly, the task names have to be homogenized and the definitions must not conflict.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6523aa12e3_39ae3fa7f3aeb2a03209b1-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 08:51:44 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96D231B2D27 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:51:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UKU6AzzaHsEc for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:51:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0084E1A1A99 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:51:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:51:41 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453740701; bh=MKDmrWzrFUkW3Uu2S7rJjOg3Gp3gjgBvG7l3GyJUAsE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=CevWI5wrjoq9Gbu17oqjlV75F0nzEoHg9Yd2h2eikDGJjSHwj/vVkkSgyRDVZHrQj gdadEOZhB39fxjaWYUTU1UimzBp2GnQdH/VACCMcLK0PNl/Nz1wFvo4NMnfEoh4OMk LvMzTb3Gf4G6uC+L5wrAX7wl9vX8qGfFOT5Uu1f4= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6529d480aa_5ce33ff0a831b2c02660cf"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Definition Tasks (#28) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:51:43 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6529d480aa_5ce33ff0a831b2c02660cf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 1.) The way it is worded at the moment, the tasks "Attribute Definition" and "Policy Definition" in the definition of SACM tasks could imply that they are conducted manually (especially "Policy Definition") and not necessarily conducted by a SACM component. This seems to be in contrast to the other tasks, which are all conducted by a SACM component. Is this intentional? Is a SACM task always conducted by a SACM component? Does every SACM task have a corresponding manual counterpart? 2.) The name of the SACM task "Attribute Definition" could be misleading. No attributes are defined, but a subset of defined attributes is aggregated in a list (that is called attribute definition at the moment). --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/28 ----==_mimepart_56a6529d480aa_5ce33ff0a831b2c02660cf Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

1.) The way it is worded at the moment, the tasks "Attribute Definition" and "Policy Definition" in the definition of SACM tasks could imply that they are conducted manually (especially "Policy Definition") and not necessarily conducted by a SACM component. This seems to be in contrast to the other tasks, which are all conducted by a SACM component.

Is this intentional? Is a SACM task always conducted by a SACM component? Does every SACM task have a corresponding manual counterpart?

2.) The name of the SACM task "Attribute Definition" could be misleading. No attributes are defined, but a subset of defined attributes is aggregated in a list (that is called attribute definition at the moment).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6529d480aa_5ce33ff0a831b2c02660cf-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 08:52:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E1E31B2D35 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:52:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8vsgKxOgBmR5 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:52:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C55D1B2D44 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:52:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:52:44 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453740764; bh=oGXr3ZiWpAqfLvbRE/kgogQA2QjDZviLVp9KRUlbRhw=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=S3AAosd06rIRUuhDzU4u2lpkNPDUWEoi62grkxsakAy66smlIKJmhZp11oDRc9Pb7 35WtXnXYSxwklTHxE3XzmlLzyreX6ZEN2tCucJPT3ereDjgQV+KI2u0FzQD5LQAvSy 4BMRsyLbjtlO4EgQi7XRv3kF5tfqfDzfjD1n9o4U= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a652dc87dee_480d3fa7f3aeb2a040907"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Guidance (#29) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:52:52 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a652dc87dee_480d3fa7f3aeb2a040907 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 1.) As a basis for discussion, the current definition of "Guidance" inclu= des the following three examples: "Configuration", "Profiles", and "Polic= ies". Is configuration guidance? The assumption is that guidance =E2=80=93 in t= he context of SACM - is machine-processable, because the architecture dra= ft (3.1.3.1) states that "A collector consumes Guidance and/or other Post= ure Assessment Information". The terms Guidance, Configuration, Posture A= ssessment Information, Profiles, Policies have to be better aligned and d= efined. 2.) The current definition of "Guidance" also highlights that guidance is= transported via the management plane. Is that correct? A related question (do we need to distinguish control pl= ane and management plane?) is raised in Issue https://github.com/sacmwg/d= raft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/3 Management Plane vs. Control Plane. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/29= ----==_mimepart_56a652dc87dee_480d3fa7f3aeb2a040907 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

1.) As a basis for discussion, the current definition of "Guidance" in= cludes the following three examples: "Configuration", "Profiles", and "Po= licies".

Is configuration guidance? The assumption is that guidance =E2=80=93 i= n the context of SACM - is machine-processable, because the architecture = draft (3.1.3.1) states that "A collector consumes Guidance and/or other P= osture Assessment Information". The terms Guidance, Configuration, Postur= e Assessment Information, Profiles, Policies have to be better aligned an= d defined.

2.) The current definition of "Guidance" also highlights that guidance= is transported via the management plane.

Is that correct? A related question (do we need to distinguish control= plane and management plane?) is raised in Issue #3 Managem= ent Plane vs. Control Plane.

&m= dash;
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a652dc87dee_480d3fa7f3aeb2a040907-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 08:53:48 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D16671B2D59 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5H1WU1UKBbQl for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-io0-x233.google.com (mail-io0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB92F1B2D54 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io0-x233.google.com with SMTP id q21so158057739iod.0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=mp/tHhC6K3jo9PgXnGZgG6fvrr58ixFnDRn/BkvKWL8=; b=fKRgVMe9v0AtmlHyyRjG0oTwPgYn74WwQBJlsCLRuN6Pw3hZO03S2zZQZeyYA5dATB 4zCbwqSA4NcgB2Iq4Zv93J5XMcfwHluDNRxGeadnJd7hA+qq0sHHpghVYtwmfml8uqT2 qfpPqOFdONZJge4uH2Cn0DKKBYDlluLzFFM/Ya7D+qu/Mp0c5Ly36o72oZjDFuoa95JZ 2NmckTuU4qC9Lfc4wrq0aTbkMvIIjiPRg/IyuncQUz30mWllCmJnf2Dxv3JRDOMYc7pt aTvnp+FIhJV+BpO35wpfsqkj3+VG/69TZmK0VHzJQgZCZWLYippu8A2bD0OmpxCxKdFi S91w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=mp/tHhC6K3jo9PgXnGZgG6fvrr58ixFnDRn/BkvKWL8=; b=C3Y3eab8iRUOJSdms368ap3w9skc0zs0iugOXtkcqZtrFDkoru7+7KpIorjq5JFySL o8Y3J9fa+DU7CITbCo/TG3J+vWEYmAH1RZzt/o8kiT6hcM8u+NICmHTcVqqCLj/SIjj6 4gVZNdBzI1IaUUPZw4psDzJc8+0SbkWYei9KkrTL3ddNi91GLo+LBDQpLRdb1+bpOUtX zX9oOuchLztSl77vZgikpoV+Nlii2faVf4kau+ViRJ9k1lhXhFH1/oZ/AAxSJfIuQm4z iyCITDscdKJx6scYBXF6Mere64/7sj/61SWHtsbcJ83x9oo4jxoSAswIEcigPdW1pKZT TAVw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSDaYmCBd1bEb7ZGui1PDkWEyuczx5ExB/lPYu+OsYTzKp5XYq0zIVRr1zyFLE4pBNxn+N6c8WjxNIYfg== X-Received: by 10.107.136.208 with SMTP id s77mr17114908ioi.142.1453740800341; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.198.4 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 08:53:01 -0800 (PST) From: Ira McDonald Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:53:01 -0500 Message-ID: To: "sacm@ietf.org" , Ira McDonald Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ea6eefffc68052a2b6750 Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] Ira in TCG meeting for first hour of SACM Interim today X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 16:53:46 -0000 --001a113ea6eefffc68052a2b6750 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, Good luck and I'll join you later. Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 --001a113ea6eefffc68052a2b6750 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

Good luck and I'll joi= n you later.

Cheers,
- Ira

=
Ira McD= onald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility So= lutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE= -ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing P= rotocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof M= usic / High North Inc
http://sites.google.c= om/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.googl= e.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter=C2=A0 579 Pa= rk Place=C2=A0 Saline, MI=C2=A0 48176=C2=A0 734-944-0094
Summer=C2=A0 PO= Box 221=C2=A0 Grand Marais, MI 49839=C2=A0 906-494-2434

--001a113ea6eefffc68052a2b6750-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 09:27:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B660D1A1BCA for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:27:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PgBfEaqDYIa8 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:27:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E7BA1B322D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:27:51 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:27:50 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453742870; bh=VRSa3/+sLzPAcrnPtY1gX/mco9y7VXuQ2IcUee5sYLM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=XFnXM7jdPLtyoqpo08p816goVyxvPaja6OsWZn5A8IFJ4Dhe8137IRl6H++Roj9PY UavMOScjMdK4t14zPnaJojmfsWOV/BaLkTojaeIRmIx2QY+It76s9VuNll4NXbtTw1 Fa/G3YnePpuxN0RP8bbwp3AbZ4ot74hXqsOBlGlU= From: llorenzin To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a65b1635f54_32c83fcfbdc3b2bc671559"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: llorenzin X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and proprietary (#81) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:27:52 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a65b1635f54_32c83fcfbdc3b2bc671559 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Consensus of 1/25 virtual interim call - change the SHOULD back to a MUST for supporting proprietary extensions. Outside of the requirements document, SACM should encourage implementers to notify SACM of proprietary extensions - perhaps via something simple like an email to the SACM mailing list, perhaps via a more structured forum if demand arises. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/81#issuecomment-174594256 ----==_mimepart_56a65b1635f54_32c83fcfbdc3b2bc671559 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Consensus of 1/25 virtual interim call - change the SHOULD back to a MUST for supporting proprietary extensions. Outside of the requirements document, SACM should encourage implementers to notify SACM of proprietary extensions - perhaps via something simple like an email to the SACM mailing list, perhaps via a more structured forum if demand arises.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a65b1635f54_32c83fcfbdc3b2bc671559-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 09:28:23 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BAC71B377E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DyNh47hGEoIg for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 461241B3778 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:18 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453742898; bh=ibCXZ3NRINjZnkgo2zkI+MH2Jqqjq0e+ec4zNkGeAY8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=GUWLoz/wnJ+0GiJRDlVqy6MvIir3KqRXgZeKwhSOJF+yBk0S4FkRFm1QOMtWsHXML wogMDn/DYToucND4qSBhgojzKXF5uyy40DYOAls4CZgosHoGXQDiUHkieZs7uNmQDv 98v7EgExTlJgSkaDHWXX7KveWYvk6KwT0sb7x/v4= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a65b324c971_237f3fe68f9372bc662856"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: sacm Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Endpoint Discovery (#14) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:28:22 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a65b324c971_237f3fe68f9372bc662856 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit addressed in term draft --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/14#issuecomment-174594386 ----==_mimepart_56a65b324c971_237f3fe68f9372bc662856 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

addressed in term draft

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a65b324c971_237f3fe68f9372bc662856-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 09:28:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 897081B3776 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x6Euax8JaV99 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFFCB1B377D for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:28:19 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453742899; bh=BFJUQEuLIfqFWW+34udNqMlhnq6fHcDZR6kSiJxki2A=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=k3cI4ED1BfZpm9h3OyXpAE1UfeK4zXERqrBeX47wKuQUkUVLxdewuQIp3E1A6LT9/ 2mtwiokJ/K8aHHpMJ0t1wEOdUT+RyQdIEKmbn8iLOEiR44cZy9VC3RUnmFEVIbWwS8 N1OddG5oYkJnrn6U/re3+wxYJXF2Khk0gqTI2VBY= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a65b3316e29_dec3f8f41f8f2b87884f8"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-GitHub-Reason: comment X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Cc: sacm Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Endpoint Discovery (#14) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 17:28:22 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a65b3316e29_dec3f8f41f8f2b87884f8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #14. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/14#event-525297239 ----==_mimepart_56a65b3316e29_dec3f8f41f8f2b87884f8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #14.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a65b3316e29_dec3f8f41f8f2b87884f8-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 11:14:54 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12EC1B3936 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lHqCkgdQhgP0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x22e.google.com (mail-oi0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39B8F1B3952 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id w75so93659400oie.0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=rvep5nchwbOcr4K1ONEVYfBM9C7yfvrVS3LgneKbQ74=; b=Ekx3xGuX/DcksIZtFagWdlqYDyrg6uPMCnd9UWdbS0Dam6kXytQ1OcT0H2mCaKUbKV NvQsqplXN5b3LBXgWNhJdGgxEstuWdMjz2VblZOxDxZmS6PIMBi9f1oexIMiCKRGx4fJ M75n6JZOtfFQYlIC9KeT7DgIkSm4WvK5fxxWqr6TNetd8JPpnsechy4WiKcjugq9hH8J 6TcvlXvEXaGVuYf7JVzfYftQ6nUA4dk1kpARcmUCI+/akgVRYhYBlzJcAh/Xvq0HMGtq Gb/w9Wpc7teWeGXVbd7aqaIyodE+8L6dxAClvQdT4ep2b1X3clLIC44InS37Vgeg9ACJ EeKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=rvep5nchwbOcr4K1ONEVYfBM9C7yfvrVS3LgneKbQ74=; b=dN1HjcIQAQv9y1HGIKPh0TiT+SQbKqE7SONNcn4oqtkM6q3p7t07cBq56ujNBpjNdv RnR7ttHdR0X0GXSIpEJ9Gt2eaW2kGy14OsczviMCMya4DTxuZ4q1+tFOghTFaKO3Rc4G k6ShYqigHPrYhADdfGICK4e3VFfADgvotZYuwB3y2M9pDkNNzXMhcMznQANDwWZgM7+k gxlTji7b3x9/e/a95/I2FDrmt3+cM30OmhifdCF6FXvvFKTGlDAC2oIa15YwjXOHrQyZ pdrGtNxZMM9w3/5z8ac5PcmnAqo8bJAV9tTwnWNaotd+VIxvKEP9X0Ps9RGnVYdbur72 mSgA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ4fxuWzDSkrmRvq69435ei1hikdXhbnSyp0R5nEryv8gRQ7UDJPciNqnb33BiXuw== X-Received: by 10.202.44.79 with SMTP id s76mr12811386ois.123.1453749290540; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j201sm11026123oih.19.2016.01.25.11.14.48 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:14:49 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_DCF83FD5-E078-44F3-8B8A-DEA919AC97CA" Message-Id: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:14:47 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 19:14:52 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_DCF83FD5-E078-44F3-8B8A-DEA919AC97CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi All: I=E2=80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: = http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz = =20 Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two polls. = Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on = March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we=E2=80=99ll = have to update drafts before Buenos Aires. Also keep in mind that it = was expressed that earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet = for some participants. Kind regards, Adam= --Apple-Mail=_DCF83FD5-E078-44F3-8B8A-DEA919AC97CA Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Hi All:

I=E2=80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 = here: http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz 

Please participate = before 23:59 UTC on February 7.

I included options for the entire week = to avoid having to run two polls.  Keep in mind that the cutoff for = IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the = week we meet, the less time we=E2=80=99ll have to update drafts before = Buenos Aires.  Also keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier = in the week would be more difficult to meet for some = participants.

Kind regards,

Adam
= --Apple-Mail=_DCF83FD5-E078-44F3-8B8A-DEA919AC97CA-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 11:48:56 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DDDB1A0099 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w6AD6Uuc4y3W for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x22b.google.com (mail-ob0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 528181A0092 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id is5so125156266obc.0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=zSA/xvZ640nwEMmhDY3RFGfzf0gUuxgCIcqq+OrhxTg=; b=ojaq5rsAXSzTN2X0N4TzVUNTJvN+YYVpVkqip4DRJCQ6jecT5zgncuGyDn9GMI//Ml uy1arXhgiTjWHv90JxUwtw0d60+GwRrmwIkscuBcwoBRbxSY5P4f9PMq4/vI425ONczz lF8ORTESyFDD8dmDYtkDxTjcWL8zS0bzej5P3V12R2idOgulrsSeg/qpPCz8rBKiEmRm 7VmtGMCdGeoT0cBmU5a533NFGCs8ACxGoTBaKultxFJalJMRW0x75PuxDooldZlyitd7 OdqyKUABsmtOreK2fqFcnpXk5mcp97IpqOGkXHZDJWjY3wRusMgBq6nk5o+TC0L59XyF Ua0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=zSA/xvZ640nwEMmhDY3RFGfzf0gUuxgCIcqq+OrhxTg=; b=aokQHNOorm/2AV7lJN7/rXdHDsX0hd4a2lY01Y/2fartCa+oiM41s1wXfb/JIbur2E QVdeb50xypj6MuTB0kB4r8BZ1xjTm4yzN8ENOJcUw+anRZq6dL3XXcjMCsHJe+S1wPTM wRNzomy0/ogM4+hltmThezP/LjDkDmHBZ5l8PuUV8vzNi6Yt/cN7eTmcpKucoDhWQ600 4HnPAm3Mst4VQqL3Li0jIa1CCLrtaROggBaKNWfeDMpYkSLzv1An8u5+3fv4xGnwhpwT f5Ks5xT9xc9rq8oJ2b58oI5SohXv5twiJm2Dx/Wzkeei07rDJd+2GhucnlK+stkg4tNa XOuw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTaUYewVFnxTvSSUkhl7P8VnItDtNOEMlfjuW7T36t4vh3UMncVvTQ2We2phKCy/A== X-Received: by 10.182.60.170 with SMTP id i10mr14527508obr.62.1453751332729; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id dh8sm11170703obb.2.2016.01.25.11.48.51 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:48:51 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0B92BF05-C315-4C6B-937C-705FFD1BB514" Message-Id: <742316C3-D1D3-4996-9BC3-AD105C1056E3@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 13:48:50 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] January Virtual Interim Recording (2016-01-25) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 19:48:55 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_0B92BF05-C315-4C6B-937C-705FFD1BB514 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 All:=20 Here=E2=80=99s the link to Dropbox for the ARF recording of today=E2=80=99= s virtual interim. I=E2=80=99ll send this link out again with the notes = when they become available. = https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bs0hioy5qh6qzr1/AAA2lzSwCFE_pfYMlpP3bRu_a?dl=3D= 0 = =20 Kind regards, Adam= --Apple-Mail=_0B92BF05-C315-4C6B-937C-705FFD1BB514 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 All: 

Here=E2=80=99s the link to Dropbox for the ARF recording of = today=E2=80=99s virtual interim.  I=E2=80=99ll send this link out = again with the notes when they become available.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bs0hioy5qh6qzr1/AAA2lzSwCFE_pfYMlpP3= bRu_a?dl=3D0 

Kind regards,

Adam
= --Apple-Mail=_0B92BF05-C315-4C6B-937C-705FFD1BB514-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:07:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AABD91A00CC for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nEc1g4rsoxay for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CCF21A00A4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:29 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752449; bh=q+1VU0ue6mClUwCeY9jMPcoWFwCacKw/XBT3QPsc/RU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=h5yOPjEiv79cOdcLyyAY0Crys4GjJ8BqGPg5VhLrvS0DsIVukjCGqjx4iYbz5QIjY RA1ZWFE4rOa9Pdr+maZcCndWdRg7/iXLyi6nzrQms5BGiwKkBd5LGsvBc7LPbtTQyl TH9VtEkKvnv0g3zQIhGw7tjILtbPbYNlaoiX9Nq4= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a680814907d_15ea3f8f0cc972c010685e"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] OP-007 a nit s/their/its/ (#75) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:07:31 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a680814907d_15ea3f8f0cc972c010685e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #75. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/75#event-525488585 ----==_mimepart_56a680814907d_15ea3f8f0cc972c010685e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #75.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a680814907d_15ea3f8f0cc972c010685e-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:08:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D409E1A00E2 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m1Hwu-vjlN1s for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E5C81A00E6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:07:54 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752474; bh=iemdVmdCqsNFgmhHpAjddTR/eA4yJkU43buYuSCwKvM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=neGIVI+kNbrkNHupeMj/Tbxh3VrYLTlERIqMrxfEyMJ7n+cM5e90u88X0ZXmX6zbq r2tfhFU7233cQ/T6LPJpJZvQQZRE6kunSOLVVzpXXK/AhcTvzeq+ZhzdnFG0+fBoql 3r02YxGP4kUgYGrlS+11R6qQ1fRBPV/3F2+WbT3I= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6809a9102d_4c5a3fe764ead2c0283224"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] OP-006 a nit s/describes/describe/ (#74) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:08:00 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6809a9102d_4c5a3fe764ead2c0283224 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #74. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/74#event-525489266 ----==_mimepart_56a6809a9102d_4c5a3fe764ead2c0283224 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #74.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6809a9102d_4c5a3fe764ead2c0283224-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:08:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D471A00E4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:08:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id radld5_iZGXW for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:08:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 383431A00E2 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:08:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:08:40 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752520; bh=x6jAt0o+mnNiRWWuyKGzjIboxgG7l5nLLSKmWZjR7K8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=cWiB8V7q7lcBlLQauOniXkthyW+9PiIzp4k4W0F4nw9DAkH7fXrLwy3dPwW1yiweA I1BX+K2CdL24gtIi81kpnla+uYmErMw+H1Hz0np51/lA9MxAGldv7ICpf4N4Ht6Q1O CR3FJpC7mAlvY7oFOGeg6fArPbDmyhn8llSkW+rM= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a680c82416c_15e13f8f0cc972c03077a8"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] DM-011 terminology suggestion (#71) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:08:42 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a680c82416c_15e13f8f0cc972c03077a8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #71. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/71#event-525490117 ----==_mimepart_56a680c82416c_15e13f8f0cc972c03077a8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #71.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a680c82416c_15e13f8f0cc972c03077a8-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:09:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA5BB1A00E4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xjrBDTtJ57h1 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72DE61A00CC for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:29 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752569; bh=B6+NiR0Bf2SpnG/t92S9ikDvxim9Ooxms9DbcUte94s=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=StUbKRaTClE1daijJ6OScFZhkvac1XZU506k3i6h//fjTHmRctiPgKyG7hPOFGX1s FX8fsUEiL5pcsrbxhqquQM/XBsOn1KWel8MJQBAm7td1hphUinH4toNT/VQu+difBp Le4CjzNs/DCkKKSK/WC94PnppcwoH4+KXMNZ/+DU= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a680f9ac9f0_459f3f8f0cc972c07033"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Update use case references (#66) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:09:31 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a680f9ac9f0_459f3f8f0cc972c07033 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #66. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/66#event-525491167 ----==_mimepart_56a680f9ac9f0_459f3f8f0cc972c07033 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #66.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a680f9ac9f0_459f3f8f0cc972c07033-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:09:45 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E59521A00CC for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uVsoeaPUpP78 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext6.iad.github.net [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2A231A00C0 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:41 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752582; bh=+Jj/GG6pEWG7EisKAc8T+1YhNXjqrHZcO6J4M89SoSs=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=npDtxtpr5/GVClsJUszwS7wQThaIoMDD9gQiqJmf+h3VGaMsncikQdJY1ZvEIyQxP NEGk678G7UEvh6vOkDNnTvOQBQHYsdGc2t74K4o4i81FuptKBcTcQdWOmuwourq1yR xNzcV6JI1WkWzMYw3qA2i0+SwxptKOWidyOwadk8= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a68105ece53_40133ffa769eb2bc40824b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Should the requirements draft define the scope of the working group? (#65) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:09:44 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a68105ece53_40133ffa769eb2bc40824b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #65. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/65#event-525491417 ----==_mimepart_56a68105ece53_40133ffa769eb2bc40824b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #65.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a68105ece53_40133ffa769eb2bc40824b-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:10:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FD21A00D7 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:10:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5TwTN4IwPGtj for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A31D1A00F5 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:09:58 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752598; bh=4rKZdLLoq+sEYlbKf3MuJWhLtgn4CbSLGay/D6Qc0pQ=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=IozZRVizyNV8OTtxZZ20/MXWcfdJKGq2PRAhoVfEUpZc57L7op4RpHgYkE13S15T6 DOTMWFY3mhKOF+IQ7Qsq5ikG/IaVfuDCRVUZHE1Ptzb6VQU6kjh/g4glFCq10BtIye F0jFOvhmSIlH5+icrVCqryCbOhqi6M/PLfnE+jhc= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a681164e3e8_43163f93b12ff2b817007b"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Change "secure" in document title to "security" (#64) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:10:00 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a681164e3e8_43163f93b12ff2b817007b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #64. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/64#event-525491764 ----==_mimepart_56a681164e3e8_43163f93b12ff2b817007b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #64.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a681164e3e8_43163f93b12ff2b817007b-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:10:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99A21A00EE for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:10:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oNH05YDjHnVG for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:10:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 560FC1A00E4 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:10:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:10:28 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752628; bh=9XYQDqEXIeaH+7utCkVQh0oSWa2LGCa2+9mapu1eJhc=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=MbOd7Q5d31j0GI3Ll8VKdjASj8Oz7qWaZtadcpVlm5djA8isPR20oMJssywRJVFrk M5Vtq/sGSIyV9+IhdfWiXAQgTKsT53UZX/Qr87wRSaK722wJUPQh9p5I9wE48DVIlW D014EYGlHLf3QMMnGLA02NFT0t7FKBoKHwX8JPDw= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a68134a308c_43283f93b12ff2b845351c"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Is an endpoint not an asset itself? (#68) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:10:31 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a68134a308c_43283f93b12ff2b845351c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #68. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/68#event-525492299 ----==_mimepart_56a68134a308c_43283f93b12ff2b845351c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #68.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a68134a308c_43283f93b12ff2b845351c-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:14:05 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AA2F1A0108 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 467X3Jw7O7sd for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B69F1A00EF for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:01 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752841; bh=SbtRcv32PH/4cdCIQAKyBz4+yBvyDrcj4aZgr4OtS3Q=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=2QYHjhbP42EKcK4UCIFQJ3g2Q4oUHeeyWljUq7qKXN8AaCLOgF1QBsdLQ8ddguoyW cXPU3f3Q3IxAOK14CS/+E6ZCq9YKdH1WyE4kNpR2N3KpET5acH/Eb3QpSpksxzRCbM amjxFYFDPcoCRtgEMPBEQ33H3RjSF0Q/0xocBlGE= From: Danny Haynes To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a682096d210_4c233fe764ead2c01653ec"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: djhaynes X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] Method for expressing the SACM Information Model and update appropriately (#27) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:14:03 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a682096d210_4c233fe764ead2c01653ec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #27. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/27#event-525496827 ----==_mimepart_56a682096d210_4c233fe764ead2c01653ec Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #27.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a682096d210_4c233fe764ead2c01653ec-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 12:14:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC97D1A00EF for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UkvS-oxzFWTb for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FE451A0105 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:14:01 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453752841; bh=rOFNrGXRVqEmxqNSxlpSd1FYXS1suDiLM+yMOkNlxM4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=eqSK6b8CfByUHJXU2NEveUiFRG+pm0TahA28lfEb9dKRNQa0ITwyu7u6E5ybw6lFz OWsUYiDMn6wz6d9Unh/30oZNHBmZmcFBXBVd9kECDUfmFN0Ks3Z2ZWLn2w/Hp9y7W7 qDzVMqmj91jVWycSQqE5lOGBise6R/k9HHyNid1g= From: Danny Haynes To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a682097259c_15e13f8f0cc972c0504376"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: djhaynes X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-information-model] Method for expressing the SACM Information Model and update appropriately (#27) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 20:14:03 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a682097259c_15e13f8f0cc972c0504376 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit IPFIX was selected as the representation for the SACM IM. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sacm/current/msg03705.html --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-information-model/issues/27#issuecomment-174647005 ----==_mimepart_56a682097259c_15e13f8f0cc972c0504376 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

IPFIX was selected as the representation for the SACM IM.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sacm/current/msg03705.html

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a682097259c_15e13f8f0cc972c0504376-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 18:10:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF9581ACDB9 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:10:32 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WHijF6rBb0_Q for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:10:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext6.iad.github.net [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 371941ACD6A for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:10:31 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:10:29 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453774229; bh=aFJ8tbRRaIWzH/iFs5Vm0YUkmFEXIHe4ALcDb61kGY8=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=rULi+eACNKH8FTz6eMHs4Rg1SrBV+Vf0GAMB6lDh0svngwEaknqNM1uZxD3OgLTyZ ARlfNOrU2Eo7z+o9Kxfwx5njaPn0QBAPT27KEpr+W1UudHZoySPuOyqBtT3Da9JJTG dNNk3hYFAj1BvgKA9IAVFynAoi2tZi7I+vx0TD9I= From: llorenzin To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6d595cdfe4_50fe3fda5bd7f29c195653"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: llorenzin X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] drop G-002 (#83) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:10:32 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6d595cdfe4_50fe3fda5bd7f29c195653 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This was raised before in https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/8 and the decision then was to leave it in. I still feel it's needed, for the same reasons I provided in that issue. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/83#issuecomment-174776638 ----==_mimepart_56a6d595cdfe4_50fe3fda5bd7f29c195653 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This was raised before in #8 and the decision then was to leave it in. I still feel it's needed, for the same reasons I provided in that issue.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6d595cdfe4_50fe3fda5bd7f29c195653-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 18:19:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7C871ACDEE for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:19:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NgNvgZ5HQiIJ for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:19:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext1.iad.github.net [192.30.252.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2C0F1ACDEB for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:19:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:19:28 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453774768; bh=3Pr5exJ2OFV5BFXg/V/VO1KQ5LwXYDaxe0EpfRIzzVI=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=AQJmlLtKhMhnTIb0+mR6nBgkYCAqWuxk4u1z1jpPpqJnqkjrqeUxwq0iXPcenP/ls 7FJCgPrFBO8uaS1qvXrs0hc9zmdAw44wQ3taa+VAZowrtKsLFHBCZY/JgrNLi5lBCN zHwwsogaunOJUM34JbrVkv/cZP4RK2vBk7zLBpwY= From: llorenzin To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6d7b0c5c22_432a3fd10d3ff2a0508925"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: llorenzin X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] T-005 Transport Reliability question (#76) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:19:31 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6d7b0c5c22_432a3fd10d3ff2a0508925 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I propose that we update the existing requirement: T-005 Transport Reliability: SACM transport protocols MUST provide reliable delivery of data. This includes the ability to perform fragmentation and reassembly, and to detect replays. to: T-005 Transport Reliability: SACM transport protocols MUST provide reliable delivery of data. This includes the ability to perform fragmentation and reassembly, and to detect replays. The SACM transport may take advantage of reliability features in the network transport; however, the network transport may be unreliable (e.g. UDP), in which case the SACM transport running over the unreliable network transport is responsible for ensuring reliability (i.e. by provisions such as confirmations and re-transmits). --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/76#issuecomment-174779088 ----==_mimepart_56a6d7b0c5c22_432a3fd10d3ff2a0508925 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I propose that we update the existing requirement:
T-005 Transport Reliability: SACM transport protocols MUST provide
reliable delivery of data. This includes the ability to perform
fragmentation and reassembly, and to detect replays.
to:
T-005 Transport Reliability: SACM transport protocols MUST provide
reliable delivery of data. This includes the ability to perform
fragmentation and reassembly, and to detect replays. The SACM transport may take advantage of reliability features in the network transport; however, the network transport may be unreliable (e.g. UDP), in which case the SACM transport running over the unreliable network transport is responsible for ensuring reliability (i.e. by provisions such as confirmations and re-transmits).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6d7b0c5c22_432a3fd10d3ff2a0508925-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 18:33:50 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 920C31ACE2E for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:33:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I5hgb8hG8h_v for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:33:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 564E51ACE2B for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:33:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:33:47 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453775627; bh=t92Z79fu2INSgP9NJD+mSTKB2eT/YrYzi5RsglqOnmk=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TVuMuqAZb3GE816SOgxQBN1LEp9gNqUTDnYNMby9ML3i8afOF8wqSUM/lwUB+xiJH /ZLpmyMXi5r+CpQS6Qk8fFkYzjYtrebx10oaipZjkOWMaVICj/dwUBMJpRg5zT0pFe 93Cv6J/saNZ1T0htlCj13tmXiJphaKBUq3PXXrF0= From: llorenzin To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a6db0ba1995_34483f8226eab2c0327c1"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: llorenzin X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Requirements terminology reconciliation with Terminology draft (#67) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:33:49 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a6db0ba1995_34483f8226eab2c0327c1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This seems like an open issue for the terminology draft rather than the requirements draft. Do you agree? If so, can we close it here and open one there? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/67#issuecomment-174783639 ----==_mimepart_56a6db0ba1995_34483f8226eab2c0327c1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

This seems like an open issue for the terminology draft rather than the requirements draft. Do you agree? If so, can we close it here and open one there?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a6db0ba1995_34483f8226eab2c0327c1-- From nobody Mon Jan 25 18:51:02 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 186631ACEA6 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:51:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.302 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bSxyyEZpx3yU for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:50:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-by2on0082.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.100.82]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 225B21ACE9C for ; Mon, 25 Jan 2016 18:50:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=SirisCapitalGroupLLC.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-pulsesecure-net; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=v5acYWwpCKUbvVV/+k2EDQiprxPyuS8RkGCbQYuQUWE=; b=sNXEozkW/R5dpiE5Eqp1GwEPokOGLURQptGFpOxQ0QGpBNDUhO7yuqVk9RLf/sf78BpA8nA2k5viTiBlvY/1U1rTZLpPG6Y/oSFP65AP066sUA86QsIrgqUHnx1qyVcAw9u+ZQRAPGek7nmVFWjdePaFgcdeiuoM9DDQ3vOcs/M= Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.28) by SN2PR0601MB0991.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:50:54 +0000 Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) by SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:50:54 +0000 From: Lisa Lorenzin To: "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft Thread-Index: AdFX47NL6zC0PlgfTra3zFVz+OM8BQ== Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:50:54 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=llorenzin@pulsesecure.net; x-originating-ip: [98.26.33.154] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN2PR0601MB0991; 5:5d9pIK5ztA6QTTwNiFCIuaHogHxFsskHSDe0+he0uWPA7x41BDMLukdPw0tQUh443ahmGwyrF2HkevkTRCvx67xjW2O/lpu1rEp2XkvAPh1N8Wd5XeMTxmJEyQKCVZKQp2DcwGfgRtF6uR6M8uDWSw==; 24:SBhnn5PmOW9I3VJjTcHdp87LpOXmfkgMiJMgzZZZPVnqNN/9FLHkRUZRvhXjbeJGO5OdwIeUSj1HRL6E9c8UBGRlYN5opFXAJqrBCqFfIDM= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 33076832-589c-4898-d069-08d325fb827a x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(520078)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; x-forefront-prvs: 08331F819E x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(189002)(53754006)(199003)(10400500002)(19580405001)(1730700002)(87936001)(2906002)(122556002)(92566002)(40100003)(86362001)(2501003)(450100001)(5004730100002)(102836003)(110136002)(76576001)(1096002)(77096005)(1220700001)(229853001)(11100500001)(107886002)(2351001)(2900100001)(5001960100002)(15975445007)(74316001)(54356999)(3846002)(33656002)(97736004)(5002640100001)(3280700002)(81156007)(6116002)(19580395003)(189998001)(101416001)(99286002)(66066001)(5008740100001)(50986999)(106356001)(105586002)(5003600100002)(586003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; H:SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: pulsesecure.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: pulsesecure.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jan 2016 02:50:54.4071 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 3290a917-9dd6-43db-843b-a3e376f9f96c X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN2PR0601MB0991 Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 02:51:01 -0000 Hi all, Jim was kind enough both to create an "Addressed" label and to apply it to = the remaining open issues as appropriate (THANK YOU!), and Adam was kind en= ough to close his open issues that were thus labeled (thank you, as well!).= It looks like we have seven un-addressed open issues remaining - you can = view this list with the filter "is:issue is:open -label:Addressed". I've updated each of the github issues to try to drive towards resolution -= here is a high-level overview: For #83 - drop G-002 - I propose that we leave as-is, as we agreed when thi= s came up previously in #8 For #82 - G-001/1: what interfaces? - I propose that we adopt Henk's sugges= tion to rename G-012 to "SACM Component Interfaces" For #81 - G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and proprietary - = I propose that we follow the consensus on the virtual interim to change the= SHOULD back to a MUST allowing proprietary extensions For #76 - T-005 Transport Reliability question #76 - I've proposed revised = text in a github comment based on Jim's point on unreliable network transpo= rts.=20 For #73 - Matching Algorithms - I propose that we move part of OP-007 into = a new DM requirements to clarify. Adam, would love to hear your thoughts h= ere. For #70 - What is the mechanism suggested by ARCH-008? - It looks like no a= ction is needed. Adam, can you confirm & close if so? For #67 - Requirements terminology reconciliation with Terminology draft - = I propose we close this issue and open a corresponding issue on the termino= logy draft, since I believe the updates need to be made to the terminology = draft to reflect the items that exist in section 2 of the requirements draf= t. Discussions, text contributions, revisions to proposed new text, etc. are m= ost welcome! I hope we can come to resolution on these issues this week, = so we can advance the Requirements draft. Regards, Lisa --=20 Lisa Lorenzin / Principal Solutions Architect llorenzin@pulsesecure.net / 919-384-7275 Pulse Secure / https://www.pulsesecure.net Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pulsesecure1 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pulse-secure Twitter: https://twitter.com/PulseSecure1 From nobody Tue Jan 26 01:02:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F72C1A8753 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:02:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nugRnCUf0Tt7 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:02:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C94F01A8755 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:02:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 01:02:31 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453798951; bh=iHI7z2fXmTd/mHuZKer1npIo1bzBr3xiNTqQ40f130Y=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TjZuldhcndApd+kL+zrh0m+1xydSXy54rA0nuePLrxx40sv8LCROuceVdWagDEjKp 0QOz9mkhv7kGTATJL7kB8xL6PuAxuAI6YIAbbOcRQiSuRSy5r1c7yrdAhOApT1hwgR i6xSP1vbOti/4mproOTKYQe2qSvnSfHYjcLdT/s0= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a736276085c_26a03fa7f17f12b81406969"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Does a repository provide data? (#25) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:02:39 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a736276085c_26a03fa7f17f12b81406969 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A repository is associated with the roles provider, consumer, and broker. Therefore, a repository does not only store, but also consumes and provides on the data plane. Correspondingly, a proxy is also associated with the roles provider, consumer, and broker, but does not store and only consumes and provides on the data plane (it might store data in regard to the control plane, though). A broker is (probably) associated with the role of a controller only. The example 4.2.4.4. in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mile-rolie-01 illustrates a repository without a defined interface to consume data (it might be implied, maybe?). This would be a different kind of repository - very similar to a collector that does not push SACM content, but has to be polled. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/25#issuecomment-174909645 ----==_mimepart_56a736276085c_26a03fa7f17f12b81406969 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

A repository is associated with the roles provider, consumer, and broker. Therefore, a repository does not only store, but also consumes and provides on the data plane. Correspondingly, a proxy is also associated with the roles provider, consumer, and broker, but does not store and only consumes and provides on the data plane (it might store data in regard to the control plane, though). A broker is (probably) associated with the role of a controller only.

The example 4.2.4.4. in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mile-rolie-01 illustrates a repository without a defined interface to consume data (it might be implied, maybe?). This would be a different kind of repository - very similar to a collector that does not push SACM content, but has to be polled.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a736276085c_26a03fa7f17f12b81406969-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 03:08:50 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34E9C1AD067 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:08:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kjmm-3iv7l74 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:08:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7B431AD066 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:08:45 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D5AQAXU6dW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYI+IStSbQaFNIMdshoBDYFjH4VwAhyBKjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhEEBAQEBAxIRClwCAQgNBAQBAQsdAwICAjAUCQgCBAESCBqHeQENpFmKSY8kAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFYY0hGuBOVmCOS0JgksrgQ8FlnkBhUWJbkqDeoMbhTyFcohRHgEBQoFNNBiBUGoBh0cBewEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A2D5AQAXU6dW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYI+IStSbQaFNIMdshoBDYFjH4VwAhyBKjgUAQEBAQEBAYEKhEEBAQEBAxIRClwCAQgNBAQBAQsdAwICAjAUCQgCBAESCBqHeQENpFmKSY8kAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFYY0hGuBOVmCOS0JgksrgQ8FlnkBhUWJbkqDeoMbhTyFcohRHgEBQoFNNBiBUGoBh0cBewEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,350,1449550800"; d="scan'208,217";a="139992914" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 26 Jan 2016 06:08:42 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.11]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 26 Jan 2016 06:08:24 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC01.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.11]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:08:23 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Adam Montville , "" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim Thread-Index: AQHRV6SwnmywU+d6qkOJm3zdkOks/p8No/pQ Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:08:22 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.47] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959AZFFEXMB04globa_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:08:49 -0000 --_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959AZFFEXMB04globa_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 QWRhbSwNCg0KV2hhdCB0aW1lIHpvbmUgYXJlIHRoZSB0aW1lIG9mIHRoZSBjYWxscyBleHByZXNz ZWQ/DQoNCihkaWQgeW91IGFjdGl2YXRlIHRoZSB0aW1lIHpvbmUgc3VwcG9ydCB3aGVuIHlvdSBj cmVhdGVkIHRoZSBEb29kbGUgcG9sbD8pDQoNClRoYW5rcyBhbmQgUmVnYXJkcywNCg0KRGFuDQoN Cg0KRnJvbTogc2FjbSBbbWFpbHRvOnNhY20tYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9m IEFkYW0gTW9udHZpbGxlDQpTZW50OiBNb25kYXksIEphbnVhcnkgMjUsIDIwMTYgOToxNSBQTQ0K VG86IDxzYWNtQGlldGYub3JnPg0KU3ViamVjdDogW3NhY21dIERvb2RsZSBQb2xsIGZvciBNYXJj aCAyMDE2IFZpcnR1YWwgSW50ZXJpbQ0KDQpIaSBBbGw6DQoNCknigJl2ZSBjcmVhdGVkIGEgRG9v ZGxlIHBvbGwgZm9yIHRoZSB3ZWVrIG9mIE1hcmNoIDcgaGVyZTogaHR0cDovL2Rvb2RsZS5jb20v cG9sbC9uYnJuZ2VjcHd6c21mZHl6PGh0dHBzOi8vdXJsZGVmZW5zZS5wcm9vZnBvaW50LmNvbS92 Mi91cmw/dT1odHRwLTNBX19kb29kbGUuY29tX3BvbGxfbmJybmdlY3B3enNtZmR5eiZkPUJRTUZh USZjPUJGcFdRdzhic3VLcGwxU2dpWkg2NFEmcj1JNGR6R3hSMzFPY05YQ0pmUXp2bHNpTFFmdWNC WFJ1Y1B2ZHJwaHBCc0ZBJm09TzdOM0QzaFV4aVh3bVZGdWJVck0xalNrVk1iSVlsbkhwZ3ZidGVT R1JCWSZzPXdYX1dfR2p4UmZHaXBmU1UzdGc3dV9ZclFFQUdtMmtIT1dmWXNMc3llZzQmZT0+DQoN ClBsZWFzZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZSBiZWZvcmUgMjM6NTkgVVRDIG9uIEZlYnJ1YXJ5IDcuDQoNCkkg aW5jbHVkZWQgb3B0aW9ucyBmb3IgdGhlIGVudGlyZSB3ZWVrIHRvIGF2b2lkIGhhdmluZyB0byBy dW4gdHdvIHBvbGxzLiAgS2VlcCBpbiBtaW5kIHRoYXQgdGhlIGN1dG9mZiBmb3IgSUVURiA5NSBz dWJtaXNzaW9ucyBpcyBhdCAyMzo1OSBVVEMgb24gTWFyY2ggMjFzdCwgc28gdGhlIGxhdGVyIGlu IHRoZSB3ZWVrIHdlIG1lZXQsIHRoZSBsZXNzIHRpbWUgd2XigJlsbCBoYXZlIHRvIHVwZGF0ZSBk cmFmdHMgYmVmb3JlIEJ1ZW5vcyBBaXJlcy4gIEFsc28ga2VlcCBpbiBtaW5kIHRoYXQgaXQgd2Fz IGV4cHJlc3NlZCB0aGF0IGVhcmxpZXIgaW4gdGhlIHdlZWsgd291bGQgYmUgbW9yZSBkaWZmaWN1 bHQgdG8gbWVldCBmb3Igc29tZSBwYXJ0aWNpcGFudHMuDQoNCktpbmQgcmVnYXJkcywNCg0KQWRh bQ0K --_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959AZFFEXMB04globa_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTQgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxl PjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJ e2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRhaG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQov KiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1z b05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGNtOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNp emU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLCJzZXJpZiI7fQ0KYTps aW5rLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5cGVybGluaw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6 Ymx1ZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCmE6dmlzaXRlZCwgc3Bhbi5Nc29I eXBlcmxpbmtGb2xsb3dlZA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6cHVycGxl Ow0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNv LXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5z LXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10 eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7fQ0KQHBhZ2UgV29yZFNlY3Rpb24x DQoJe3NpemU6NjEyLjBwdCA3OTIuMHB0Ow0KCW1hcmdpbjo3Mi4wcHQgOTAuMHB0IDcyLjBwdCA5 MC4wcHQ7fQ0KZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQotLT48L3N0 eWxlPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0cyB2OmV4dD0iZWRp dCIgc3BpZG1heD0iMTAyNiIgLz4NCjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5 XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRtYXAgdjpleHQ9ImVk aXQiIGRhdGE9IjEiIC8+DQo8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8L2hl YWQ+DQo8Ym9keSBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgbGluaz0iYmx1ZSIgdmxpbms9InB1cnBsZSI+DQo8ZGl2 IGNsYXNzPSJXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtz YW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPkFkYW0sPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9w Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9y OiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGli cmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5XaGF0IHRpbWUg em9uZSBhcmUgdGhlIHRpbWUgb2YgdGhlIGNhbGxzIGV4cHJlc3NlZD8NCjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9z cGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEu MHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+KGRp ZCB5b3UgYWN0aXZhdGUgdGhlIHRpbWUgem9uZSBzdXBwb3J0IHdoZW4geW91IGNyZWF0ZWQgdGhl IERvb2RsZSBwb2xsPyk8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJp JnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt c2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNl cmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPlRoYW5rcyBhbmQgUmVnYXJkcyw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv c3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEx LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVv dDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1 b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPkRh bjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7 c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48 L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtm b250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29s b3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iYm9y ZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQgYmx1ZSAxLjVwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBjbSAwY20gMGNt IDQuMHB0Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItdG9wOnNvbGlk ICNCNUM0REYgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwY20gMGNtIDBjbSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1RhaG9tYSZxdW90 OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7Ij4gc2FjbSBbbWFpbHRvOnNhY20tYm91bmNlc0BpZXRm Lm9yZ10NCjxiPk9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiA8L2I+QWRhbSBNb250dmlsbGU8YnI+DQo8Yj5TZW50Ojwv Yj4gTW9uZGF5LCBKYW51YXJ5IDI1LCAyMDE2IDk6MTUgUE08YnI+DQo8Yj5Ubzo8L2I+ICZsdDtz YWNtQGlldGYub3JnJmd0Ozxicj4NCjxiPlN1YmplY3Q6PC9iPiBbc2FjbV0gRG9vZGxlIFBvbGwg Zm9yIE1hcmNoIDIwMTYgVmlydHVhbCBJbnRlcmltPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0K PHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+SGkgQWxsOjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+SeKAmXZlIGNyZWF0ZWQgYSBEb29kbGUgcG9sbCBmb3IgdGhlIHdl ZWsgb2YgTWFyY2ggNyBoZXJlOiZuYnNwOzxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHBzOi8vdXJsZGVmZW5zZS5wcm9v ZnBvaW50LmNvbS92Mi91cmw/dT1odHRwLTNBX19kb29kbGUuY29tX3BvbGxfbmJybmdlY3B3enNt ZmR5eiZhbXA7ZD1CUU1GYVEmYW1wO2M9QkZwV1F3OGJzdUtwbDFTZ2laSDY0USZhbXA7cj1JNGR6 R3hSMzFPY05YQ0pmUXp2bHNpTFFmdWNCWFJ1Y1B2ZHJwaHBCc0ZBJmFtcDttPU83TjNEM2hVeGlY d21WRnViVXJNMWpTa1ZNYklZbG5IcGd2YnRlU0dSQlkmYW1wO3M9d1hfV19HanhSZkdpcGZTVTN0 Zzd1X1lyUUVBR20ya0hPV2ZZc0xzeWVnNCZhbXA7ZT0iPmh0dHA6Ly9kb29kbGUuY29tL3BvbGwv bmJybmdlY3B3enNtZmR5ejwvYT4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2 Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+UGxlYXNlIHBhcnRpY2lwYXRlIGJlZm9yZSAyMzo1OSBV VEMgb24gRmVicnVhcnkgNy48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xh c3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+SSBpbmNsdWRlZCBvcHRpb25zIGZvciB0aGUgZW50aXJlIHdlZWsgdG8g YXZvaWQgaGF2aW5nIHRvIHJ1biB0d28gcG9sbHMuICZuYnNwO0tlZXAgaW4gbWluZCB0aGF0IHRo ZSBjdXRvZmYgZm9yIElFVEYgOTUgc3VibWlzc2lvbnMgaXMgYXQgMjM6NTkgVVRDIG9uIE1hcmNo IDIxc3QsIHNvIHRoZSBsYXRlciBpbiB0aGUgd2VlayB3ZSBtZWV0LCB0aGUgbGVzcyB0aW1lIHdl 4oCZbGwgaGF2ZSB0byB1cGRhdGUgZHJhZnRzIGJlZm9yZQ0KIEJ1ZW5vcyBBaXJlcy4gJm5ic3A7 QWxzbyBrZWVwIGluIG1pbmQgdGhhdCBpdCB3YXMgZXhwcmVzc2VkIHRoYXQgZWFybGllciBpbiB0 aGUgd2VlayB3b3VsZCBiZSBtb3JlIGRpZmZpY3VsdCB0byBtZWV0IGZvciBzb21lIHBhcnRpY2lw YW50cy48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+S2luZCByZWdhcmRzLDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj5BZGFtPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959AZFFEXMB04globa_-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 03:36:31 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85BF1AD367 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:36:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2DedHSEQ6d3U for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:36:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com (p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com [135.11.29.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 845881AD366 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:36:29 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D3AQBDWadW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK4E/BohRshoBDYFjhg8CgUc4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBAQMSKEsEAgEIDQEDBAEBCxQJBzIUCQgBAQQBEggah3kBpGaZawEBAQEBBQEBAQEBAQEBGIY0hGuES4MsgQ8FlnkBlxKFPI5DHgEBQoNpaodIAXsBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A2D3AQBDWadW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK4E/BohRshoBDYFjhg8CgUc4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoRBAQEBAQMSKEsEAgEIDQEDBAEBCxQJBzIUCQgBAQQBEggah3kBpGaZawEBAQEBBQEBAQEBAQEBGIY0hGuES4MsgQ8FlnkBlxKFPI5DHgEBQoNpaodIAXsBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,350,1449550800"; d="scan'208";a="163450201" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by p-us1-iereast-outbound.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 26 Jan 2016 06:36:28 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.13]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 26 Jan 2016 06:36:27 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:36:22 -0500 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Lisa Lorenzin , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft Thread-Index: AdFX47NL6zC0PlgfTra3zFVz+OM8BQASe2cg Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:36:21 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8B4A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.47] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:36:31 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Lorenzin > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:51 AM > To: sacm@ietf.org > Subject: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > Jim was kind enough both to create an "Addressed" label and to apply it t= o > the remaining open issues as appropriate (THANK YOU!), and Adam was kind > enough to close his open issues that were thus labeled (thank you, as wel= l!). > It looks like we have seven un-addressed open issues remaining - you can > view this list with the filter "is:issue is:open -label:Addressed". >=20 > I've updated each of the github issues to try to drive towards resolution= - > here is a high-level overview: >=20 > For #83 - drop G-002 - I propose that we leave as-is, as we agreed when t= his > came up previously in #8 For #82 - G-001/1: what interfaces? - I propose = that > we adopt Henk's suggestion to rename G-012 to "SACM Component > Interfaces" > For #81 - G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and proprietary = - I > propose that we follow the consensus on the virtual interim to change the > SHOULD back to a MUST allowing proprietary extensions For #76 - T-005 > Transport Reliability question #76 - I've proposed revised text in a gith= ub > comment based on Jim's point on unreliable network transports. Lisa, Those two are 'mine', and I am fine with the resolutions proposed by you.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan From nobody Tue Jan 26 13:47:52 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64FF91B31E3 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I80qDeS7FbXU for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x232.google.com (mail-ob0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 735F11B31E2 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-x232.google.com with SMTP id vt7so153252211obb.1 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=KiEN2Noxg86PDf+DoW8cvAejoPkdYqby0zCRjF1a+Lc=; b=vZgtN3FDpfcNZfTBQGtBn+Hn4D5ZE4Bm5vr9yi502XA5qjIvuFyktPjTzKAlc2Ylvh R3+cuib4xQfHdCmmeHTFaJHyuUaRiMd6U89ENEJsQfyJwBbl4Khy8zrHDsUzA3koqxeC yNt+GGV43yADC5Rgo+n9DYvYAeUNkD3uvV2D/I9c+NiTw3E55M8fZ+cIck6ObJ5pyc6Z 1oPGlW7rJkIQaTv2d3+Hi+ouhLKqfH/T1POkadzI6I9WMaWNcqZTItxKnv1zW2qWvV8l SVtfxxlkJoKuAFDmwAEudqXPtvuLZu4blpK1c2a66H1DZGH5XWxwMJgDhIIrF3BPYw34 US2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=KiEN2Noxg86PDf+DoW8cvAejoPkdYqby0zCRjF1a+Lc=; b=dwWCxFXgXV9iFtQCCKJzetwY3Kq9ZFXN7z8O+2El9EwKqxIT3bVmO5H4DTQhM/mO/p LFqk6n4fPCsaJ4PyfHNMd7+7EXYR/unvJf5FUTf1p4jwamRGlmk5S2lK9+/co6Tf5bj3 Ri3idH3VOY2tbe5LDBoBWTW2eCZ3SRmyGafVd6x+3VDH2X4M1fP3eVowLtC6rUOCTZ6k B1tg9u2O+DOzWFFA825W9npRkMCrZEy5loH+ZMuszF55ru3YNiFWZrgyTIBINa3ZL8MR X68Lcso4qX/PhVnhwbqRgtXDbMJhIx0+/7w7StHIh0U+Q6fC01aLNDjrWWGcYZtNo/pU 87hA== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQrrIfVJrnpKDk/EV3UGRU+Yb/BdJQvwQ25ObnjDnHiYE+Depy4Y7EN5dj5UuzCGQ== X-Received: by 10.60.101.199 with SMTP id fi7mr3065066oeb.20.1453844868818; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i4sm1544851oel.12.2016.01.26.13.47.46 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:47:47 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FFB62051-7E9B-4FAC-A7FF-3ED114DB2488" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) From: Adam Montville In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 15:47:45 -0600 Message-Id: References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> To: "Dan (Dan) Romascanu" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Cc: "" Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 21:47:51 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_FFB62051-7E9B-4FAC-A7FF-3ED114DB2488 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Thank you for the question, Dan. I thought I had enabled timezone = support, but it appears that I did not. The times I entered are all = CST (UTC-6). =20 Apologies to all. Is it worthwhile to restart the poll? > On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) = wrote: >=20 > Adam, > =20 > What time zone are the time of the calls expressed? > =20 > (did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle = poll?) > =20 > Thanks and Regards, > =20 > Dan > =20 > =20 > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Montville > Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM > To: > Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim > =20 > Hi All: > =20 > I=E2=80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: = http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz = =20 > =20 > Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. > =20 > I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two = polls. Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 = UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time = we=E2=80=99ll have to update drafts before Buenos Aires. Also keep in = mind that it was expressed that earlier in the week would be more = difficult to meet for some participants. > =20 > Kind regards, > =20 > Adam --Apple-Mail=_FFB62051-7E9B-4FAC-A7FF-3ED114DB2488 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Thank you for the question, Dan.  I thought I had = enabled timezone support, but it appears that I did  not.  The = times I entered are all CST (UTC-6).  

Apologies to all.  Is it = worthwhile to restart the poll?

On = Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <dromasca@avaya.com> = wrote:

Adam,
 
What time zone are the time of the calls = expressed?
 
(did you activate the time zone support when you created the = Doodle poll?)
 
Thanks and Regards,
 
Dan
 
 
From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf = Of Adam = Montville
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 = 9:15 PM
To: <sacm@ietf.org>
Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for = March 2016 Virtual Interim
 
Hi All:
 
I=E2=80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of = March 7 here: http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz 
 
Please participate before 23:59 UTC on = February 7.
 
I included options for the entire week to avoid = having to run two polls.  Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 = submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we = meet, the less time we=E2=80=99ll have to update drafts before Buenos = Aires.  Also keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier in the = week would be more difficult to meet for some participants.
 
Kind regards,
 
Adam

= --Apple-Mail=_FFB62051-7E9B-4FAC-A7FF-3ED114DB2488-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 14:06:10 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D711B3212 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p20bOf8PqtYP for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x234.google.com (mail-ob0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 399041B3211 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-x234.google.com with SMTP id is5so153363738obc.0 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=fSyivwYGo3q6pkF50/PSK7+WBfxG70HrsN7HXguOzYQ=; b=C5uDU9eQ0mwR/KRN/ZDZKgdOaFFWQr+e/6AdxFbeUZFi4QMwckO+UUJ7CdBM/zP7jY apQCrbZZ6lN7Ut7+bj+Vtw9jMHeXOXU/wZ5leMJHJa4o6uk126AV4OBuMK0UMFNhjvkM VZ5dfDaHnDbGKRaU3jvFwnavHv91FHKcCfW18B4gbFh5Q+uc0aFsHRHsgsmtKGy4FKFw U0qB7YO5rY6X/RXIXw69UkHoH65RbYCi/sa5jcoeaPnb6xs0cr2751kvnXIPiv9fIiX3 xZ41us679FP/XHyqpVbos15OOloNwBWucV9PMx25Mk9KUsrge1qg9qTT4Z3G8LDszhie 8oHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=fSyivwYGo3q6pkF50/PSK7+WBfxG70HrsN7HXguOzYQ=; b=UQzlZ/9YlGNd7qzTurGNr8lu7e1rXLenN+MyPaCs61AEtNw8pkr0klLfyA6XaDz0ra A2AkxUKRooCiz/Z8LR3m1lL5CYAt2OtgryQRQ0CdpbuU0nj9hG9cqT/5azhWlBXKxhk5 7dinFAhg8wbLQpgkhc7eNk7impy7Q7QgIRWeQ96p/OXXlKud8WkBxpYyNJM01s5mlPu1 DYoX92cvav0Z79wnpjO6nS5u2KUp5ne/rF2DauCplQf744YHehTjz/kbrcUNqViw7Scr epbm9OgaF3SxmAmANMTWE/dep1CIxIUF6jY35DjBTpCsme1QSMlDs78R7bsKAJlViBz2 0uLw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQHiJcJSVhXJN6r/UQhSFXzKxH4/nglWq49MPFpWO29lI+njksoywHopx4uDnvhaw== X-Received: by 10.182.241.134 with SMTP id wi6mr19531246obc.81.1453845967649; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from macbook-pro.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gp6sm400371obb.19.2016.01.26.14.06.06 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:06:06 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_8A83C447-EB9D-4A1F-BC0C-ACF05D6D76B4" Message-Id: Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:06:05 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] January Virtual Interim Notes - 2016-01-25 X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:06:09 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_8A83C447-EB9D-4A1F-BC0C-ACF05D6D76B4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 All: I=E2=80=99ve uploaded consolidated minutes (with raw notes) in one PDF = file to our proceedings: = https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/01/25/sacm/minutes/minutes-i= nterim-2016-sacm-1 = As a reminder, the meeting recording is available here: = https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bs0hioy5qh6qzr1/AAA2lzSwCFE_pfYMlpP3bRu_a?dl=3D= 0 = If you find any discrepancies in the minutes, please let me know. Kind regards, Adam= --Apple-Mail=_8A83C447-EB9D-4A1F-BC0C-ACF05D6D76B4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 All:

I=E2=80= =99ve uploaded consolidated minutes (with raw notes) in one PDF file to = our proceedings: https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/interim/2016/01/25/sacm/minute= s/minutes-interim-2016-sacm-1

As a reminder, the meeting recording is = available here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bs0hioy5qh6qzr1/AAA2lzSwCFE_pfYMlpP3= bRu_a?dl=3D0

If you find any discrepancies in the minutes, please let me = know.

Kind = regards,

Adam
= --Apple-Mail=_8A83C447-EB9D-4A1F-BC0C-ACF05D6D76B4-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 14:40:26 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B281B3289 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uEaoA5MULNcj for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ig0-x232.google.com (mail-ig0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A43A1B328E for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:15 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ig0-x232.google.com with SMTP id ik10so68252683igb.1 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=MsXv1aqDUWABQxfW2Sk9t97qEnBL8AZ0RNpAWVhZ51A=; b=MRgq4llFcyPeBKVdKsTBIqXBzC2CqcRsixbFwrG54gzNExXdXHtTP4PS/a6V1LYXnG GkOPQsxfKAGD0I9J/z28qC21jGKGPvEqQETYF7vGtrrhJs34Rgo6wwMy6PtbOYwOdANz Jz2yFOqOpDn5OE0OA5uUN9toqMwA5bSrxeAeQ3dICVNJqcGue6B7qoYhWJ+RhNsTwOP5 Pc17DCzA3CT7hbBUiTqvM+IuEOOSqUbT55X101hmA9ewJZ8tGQqbYqFs30W4Wkc0ugnE 5boCMXG3in0j1jo5tssPGyo22Sx6rGf2NI0vsR1xCEdz/Fha0xi9Cc2RUUgqQRtvifGW PWlw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=MsXv1aqDUWABQxfW2Sk9t97qEnBL8AZ0RNpAWVhZ51A=; b=IIqZb3ewqSEOorcGbLB1qqWtEFFXTirQPMVzLV5/7kZM+U+D07V2ibwgQnMFTdIpod kqjQz6kgc6EqzyFPoh9UJzZIVWQ5tJh9H3vRpUs7VLLJOHpIejXp+dJTmq3WH2tiJ+aL 6ZZY7EARifnGmIFXllZ6BecHEKIeiQgJXggdM/vUfX5ZJgTsztQ/gDqwybVmGkMXz13Q mPf71u+6P+JoC5QoqG8qnJBTptejsH/8dU5a8p4iZ1Qff0wYAXSbhGsMW778bAVX6U52 NvQ1DxtxY2+Y0wVrVI6A6u7LprkADqJYtXgIL+wJZFj6dxLbYYzasOeDPtgglcMVH1Io 9J7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORqITuBB03jBVgf/mPe4hJtE1sq+b6aG5VuXlbbIld2WmjIwqHDFrw6LQFlU1GXDD1ZJhPnsehznV4zoA== X-Received: by 10.50.150.7 with SMTP id ue7mr25742304igb.74.1453848014737; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:40:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.198.4 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:39:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> From: Ira McDonald Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:39:55 -0500 Message-ID: To: Adam Montville , Ira McDonald Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113320d479da95052a445ee1 Archived-At: Cc: "Dan \(Dan\) Romascanu" , "" Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:40:23 -0000 --001a113320d479da95052a445ee1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Adam, YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered based on US EST times. Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville wrote: > Thank you for the question, Dan. I thought I had enabled timezone > support, but it appears that I did not. The times I entered are all CST > (UTC-6). > > Apologies to all. Is it worthwhile to restart the poll? > > On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > wrote: > > Adam, > > What time zone are the time of the calls expressed? > > (did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle poll?= ) > > Thanks and Regards, > > Dan > > > *From:* sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org ] *On > Behalf Of *Adam Montville > *Sent:* Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM > *To:* > *Subject:* [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim > > Hi All: > > I=E2=80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: > http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz > > > > Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. > > I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two polls. > Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on > March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we=E2=80=99ll= have to > update drafts before Buenos Aires. Also keep in mind that it was express= ed > that earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet for some > participants. > > Kind regards, > > Adam > > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > > --001a113320d479da95052a445ee1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Adam,

YES - please discar= d and restart the poll - I naively answered based on US EST times.

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - T= CG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing = WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO P= WG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Prin= ter MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com<= br>Winter=C2=A0 579 Park Place=C2=A0 Saline, MI=C2=A0 48176=C2=A0 734-944-0= 094
Summer=C2=A0 PO Box 221=C2=A0 Grand Marais, MI 49839=C2=A0 906-494-2= 434


On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montvi= lle <adam.w.montville@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you = for the question, Dan.=C2=A0 I thought I had enabled timezone support, but = it appears that I did =C2=A0not.=C2=A0 The times I entered are all CST (UTC= -6). =C2=A0

Apologies to all.=C2=A0 Is it worthwhile to = restart the poll?

On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <= dromasca@avaya.com<= /a>> wrote:

Adam,
=
=C2=A0
= What time zone are the time of the calls expressed?
=C2=A0
(did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle poll= ?)
=C2=A0
Thanks and Regards,
=
=C2=A0
= Dan
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2= =A0
Hi All:
=C2=A0
I=E2= =80=99ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here:=C2=A0http:/= /doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz=C2=A0
<= div style=3D"margin:0cm 0cm 0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",ser= if;font-size:12pt">=C2=A0
Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7.
=C2=A0
I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two= polls.=C2=A0 Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23= :59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we= =E2=80=99ll have to update drafts before Buenos Aires.=C2=A0 Also keep in m= ind that it was expressed that earlier in the week would be more difficult = to meet for some participants.
=C2=A0
Kind regards= ,
=C2=A0
Adam


_________________________= ______________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm


--001a113320d479da95052a445ee1-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 16:49:33 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D671A1A9C for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:49:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lGbZ2KVWu9Fj for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:49:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0693.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::693]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26C731A1AA6 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:49:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=SirisCapitalGroupLLC.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-pulsesecure-net; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=DGZDTDWpwZL8BMq4p2BzAwx3Uv8uuVCxoYNOS/IQR/w=; b=O/+u/kPVj3XhSMKrXZqlpHspLJhU0s397+pwYLc/4RwI8R/xqjpVLUGBFwVTYgAAR8VLMMz8bO88Z6E6u2Kdn2FnaGAzzjOt3lVCAL6X7Bud+ZPEtGMF74PSY9xM7CmM61xltn55OHoWlHLoVGHpdKbp3cMShADP0ssKJmZDfCQ= Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.28) by SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:49:11 +0000 Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) by SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:49:11 +0000 From: Lisa Lorenzin To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft Thread-Index: AdFX47NL6zC0PlgfTra3zFVz+OM8BQASe2cgABtCATA= Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:49:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8B4A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8B4A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=llorenzin@pulsesecure.net; x-originating-ip: [98.26.33.154] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN2PR0601MB0992; 5:MQGOTsp26c7APlGQYaCB8fmMIz3/+dCQnx1GUUYU5qcJqNn3I7nypbcN21FXg+jBJ5buxiPLCLbELyv+5pXkZ/9iNW49m1l1kMG4iKxnzabFKkRe419HmJDzmP2sMZCrBsKjBYnJS1ZLsqbBej9Pyw==; 24:45u7M4HbaI/tJrBknDxwgkpCi7mSuUtA42siJvhlotmxfC4UbO8Gq2tubqvfteAwxnhyryJnWUN29GzWcBfu4oRaU5H3mBea0U7m8t00uPI= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0992; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 6324dba2-eab0-4f88-7b77-08d326b3abb0 x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0992; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0992; x-forefront-prvs: 0834BAF534 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(53754006)(164054003)(13464003)(199003)(1096002)(10400500002)(33656002)(19580405001)(87936001)(122556002)(86362001)(40100003)(2501003)(92566002)(5004730100002)(2906002)(1220700001)(102836003)(107886002)(2900100001)(11100500001)(76576001)(97736004)(74316001)(5001960100002)(54356999)(15975445007)(3846002)(2950100001)(189998001)(5001770100001)(6116002)(5002640100001)(99286002)(19580395003)(77096005)(76176999)(81156007)(66066001)(3280700002)(5008740100001)(50986999)(106356001)(105586002)(586003)(5003600100002)(3470700001)(101416001)(7059030); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0992; H:SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: pulsesecure.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: pulsesecure.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Jan 2016 00:49:10.9280 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 3290a917-9dd6-43db-843b-a3e376f9f96c X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN2PR0601MB0992 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:49:31 -0000 Hi Dan, Sorry, you say "these two are mine" but there are four in the quoted text (= 83,82,81,76). Just to make sure I understand, will you please clarify whic= h item #s you mean? Thanks, Lisa -----Original Message----- From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 6:36 AM To: Lisa Lorenzin ; sacm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draf= t > -----Original Message----- > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Lorenzin > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:51 AM > To: sacm@ietf.org > Subject: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft >=20 > Hi all, >=20 > Jim was kind enough both to create an "Addressed" label and to apply it t= o > the remaining open issues as appropriate (THANK YOU!), and Adam was kind > enough to close his open issues that were thus labeled (thank you, as wel= l!). > It looks like we have seven un-addressed open issues remaining - you can > view this list with the filter "is:issue is:open -label:Addressed". >=20 > I've updated each of the github issues to try to drive towards resolution= - > here is a high-level overview: >=20 > For #83 - drop G-002 - I propose that we leave as-is, as we agreed when t= his > came up previously in #8 For #82 - G-001/1: what interfaces? - I propose = that > we adopt Henk's suggestion to rename G-012 to "SACM Component > Interfaces" > For #81 - G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and proprietary = - I > propose that we follow the consensus on the virtual interim to change the > SHOULD back to a MUST allowing proprietary extensions For #76 - T-005 > Transport Reliability question #76 - I've proposed revised text in a gith= ub > comment based on Jim's point on unreliable network transports. Lisa, Those two are 'mine', and I am fine with the resolutions proposed by you.=20 Thanks and Regards, Dan _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Tue Jan 26 16:52:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77DCC1A1ACA for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:52:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KCAr07t94_UY for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:52:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11B8E1A1AB9 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:52:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u0R0q0rC011002 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:52:01 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0R0q0f5005907 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:52:00 GMT Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0R0q0uI008618 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:52:00 GMT Received: from [10.132.149.61] (/10.132.149.61) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:52:00 -0800 References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> To: sacm@ietf.org From: Jarrett Lu Message-ID: <56A814AD.90405@oracle.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:51:57 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010004060601060606040208" X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: jarrett.lu@oracle.com List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:52:04 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010004060601060606040208 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the time has been translated to your local time". I recall there used to a button in upper right corner telling me the time zone and gave me an option to translate it to my time zone. I don't see that option any more. I assume that is because time zone support is enabled. - Jarrett On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote: > Hi Adam, > > YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered based > on US EST times. > > Cheers, > - Ira > > > Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) > Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG > Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG > Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group > Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG > IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB > Blue Roof Music / High North Inc > http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic > http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc > mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com > Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 > Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 > > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville > > wrote: > > Thank you for the question, Dan. I thought I had enabled timezone > support, but it appears that I did not. The times I entered are > all CST (UTC-6). > > Apologies to all. Is it worthwhile to restart the poll? > >> On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) >> > wrote: >> >> Adam, >> What time zone are the time of the calls expressed? >> (did you activate the time zone support when you created the >> Doodle poll?) >> Thanks and Regards, >> Dan >> *From:*sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org]*On Behalf Of*Adam >> Montville >> *Sent:*Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM >> *To:*> >> *Subject:*[sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim >> Hi All: >> I’ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: >> http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz >> >> >> Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. >> I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two >> polls. Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at >> 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the >> less time we’ll have to update drafts before Buenos Aires. Also >> keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier in the week would >> be more difficult to meet for some participants. >> Kind regards, >> Adam > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > > > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm --------------010004060601060606040208 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the time has been translated to your local time".  I recall there used to a button in upper right corner telling me the time zone and gave me an option to translate it to my time zone. I don't see that option any more. I assume that is because time zone support is enabled.

- Jarrett


On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote:
Hi Adam,

YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered based on US EST times.

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434


On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville <adam.w.montville@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you for the question, Dan.  I thought I had enabled timezone support, but it appears that I did  not.  The times I entered are all CST (UTC-6).  

Apologies to all.  Is it worthwhile to restart the poll?

On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <dromasca@avaya.com> wrote:

Adam,
 
What time zone are the time of the calls expressed?
 
(did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle poll?)
 
Thanks and Regards,
 
Dan
 
 
From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Montville
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM
To: <sacm@ietf.org>
Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim
 
Hi All:
 
I’ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz 
 
Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7.
 
I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two polls.  Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we’ll have to update drafts before Buenos Aires.  Also keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet for some participants.
 
Kind regards,
 
Adam


_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm




_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

--------------010004060601060606040208-- From nobody Tue Jan 26 16:57:37 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089C21A1B4B for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:57:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xgqPerEeA1ab for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:57:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0062.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B7B9C1A1B3C for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:57:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=SirisCapitalGroupLLC.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-pulsesecure-net; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=239tMaGUDthLNmXhMBZ89FAqueSQwVQHzNwukQX69hY=; b=Th2fP8YTITJ6q+YzbfPM3LLWtz6fRuYT8hMaQs3x/NvacLa5FglbtTh9YpUraGJBn6cu8QZLZWowWnptdah46PP3VWbUOvk1A6PNchwFI2sxpph62Ke640L4IRuR3G4eIY0s4KKXGPq2/3MKm35nCS2OAUoLSNMBNynUUl4ev7E= Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.28) by SN2PR0601MB0991.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.160.58.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.365.19; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:57:28 +0000 Received: from SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) by SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.58.28]) with mapi id 15.01.0365.024; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:57:29 +0000 From: Lisa Lorenzin To: Ira McDonald , Adam Montville Thread-Topic: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim Thread-Index: AQHRV6StwK35uDiXe0+GfBAzFVANNp8NpHMAgACypICAAA6UgIAAJX8Q Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:57:29 +0000 Message-ID: References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=llorenzin@pulsesecure.net; x-originating-ip: [98.26.33.154] x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN2PR0601MB0991; 5:8TyeGoLSOQllP4ioEwOwZ8lTQHK7NPq5se1vrmP5Gk85jZJSopQBGTq+tmnXHMXCbX4O2mvJcoDDl/0gC7jpd/csOz+EwLFlp+bDV7FIUy9DenuFj8mvq8mGe88hpNOQXaP5eSVPfvgvc1Sadt+v4Q==; 24:4fwGB3OZVVuLQVejjV4dWhcRr5L0HHR3pPiJkU6Fg1rMFEQZVGj1hY5ZPxk0Pva/k4YG1wg3aT+lw717ceW6HJw9vbEmX65bTr/arpVjnb0= x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 953d0956-4790-4211-811e-08d326b4d49e x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(10201501046)(3002001); SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; x-forefront-prvs: 0834BAF534 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(377454003)(189002)(53754006)(24454002)(13464003)(199003)(71364002)(4326007)(10400500002)(122556002)(19580405001)(87936001)(2906002)(33656002)(93886004)(92566002)(40100003)(15395725005)(86362001)(5004730100002)(102836003)(76576001)(2900100001)(97736004)(74316001)(15975445007)(54356999)(5001960100002)(1720100001)(3846002)(2950100001)(1220700001)(189998001)(5001770100001)(6116002)(5002640100001)(99286002)(19580395003)(76176999)(81156007)(66066001)(3280700002)(5008740100001)(50986999)(106356001)(106116001)(105586002)(586003)(5003600100002)(3470700001)(101416001)(77096005)(19273905006)(1096002)(7059030)(16351025005)(563064011); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:SN2PR0601MB0991; H:SN2PR0601MB0992.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: pulsesecure.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: pulsesecure.net X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Jan 2016 00:57:29.0935 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 3290a917-9dd6-43db-843b-a3e376f9f96c X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN2PR0601MB0991 Archived-At: Cc: "Dan \(Dan\) Romascanu" , "" Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:57:36 -0000 KzENCg0KSSdtIDk5JSBsZXNzIGxpa2VseSB0byBzY3JldyB1cCB0aW1lLXpvbmUtY29udmVyc2lv biBpZiB0aW1lIHpvbmUgc3VwcG9ydCBpcyB0dXJuZWQgb24gKGVzcGVjaWFsbHkgZ2l2ZW4gdGhh dCB0b21vcnJvdyBJIHdpbGwgYmUgaW4gbXkgdGhpcmQgdGltZXpvbmUgaW4gdGhlIHBhc3Qgd2Vl ayA6LS8gKS4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCkxpc2ENCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0N CkZyb206IHNhY20gW21haWx0bzpzYWNtLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBJ cmEgTWNEb25hbGQNClNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNkYXksIEphbnVhcnkgMjYsIDIwMTYgNTo0MCBQTQ0KVG86 IEFkYW0gTW9udHZpbGxlIDxhZGFtLncubW9udHZpbGxlQGdtYWlsLmNvbT47IElyYSBNY0RvbmFs ZCA8Ymx1ZXJvb2ZtdXNpY0BnbWFpbC5jb20+DQpDYzogRGFuIChEYW4pIFJvbWFzY2FudSA8ZHJv bWFzY2FAYXZheWEuY29tPjsgPHNhY21AaWV0Zi5vcmc+IDxzYWNtQGlldGYub3JnPg0KU3ViamVj dDogUmU6IFtzYWNtXSBEb29kbGUgUG9sbCBmb3IgTWFyY2ggMjAxNiBWaXJ0dWFsIEludGVyaW0N Cg0KSGkgQWRhbSwNCg0KWUVTIC0gcGxlYXNlIGRpc2NhcmQgYW5kIHJlc3RhcnQgdGhlIHBvbGwg LSBJIG5haXZlbHkgYW5zd2VyZWQgYmFzZWQgb24gVVMgRVNUIHRpbWVzLg0KDQpDaGVlcnMsDQot IElyYQ0KDQoNCklyYSBNY0RvbmFsZCAoTXVzaWNpYW4gLyBTb2Z0d2FyZSBBcmNoaXRlY3QpIENv LUNoYWlyIC0gVENHIFRydXN0ZWQgTW9iaWxpdHkgU29sdXRpb25zIFdHIENoYWlyIC0gTGludXgg Rm91bmRhdGlvbiBPcGVuIFByaW50aW5nIFdHIFNlY3JldGFyeSAtIElFRUUtSVNUTyBQcmludGVy IFdvcmtpbmcgR3JvdXAgQ28tQ2hhaXIgLSBJRUVFLUlTVE8gUFdHIEludGVybmV0IFByaW50aW5n IFByb3RvY29sIFdHIElFVEYgRGVzaWduYXRlZCBFeHBlcnQgLSBJUFAgJiBQcmludGVyIE1JQiBC bHVlIFJvb2YgTXVzaWMgLyBIaWdoIE5vcnRoIEluYyBodHRwOi8vc2l0ZXMuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS9z aXRlL2JsdWVyb29mbXVzaWMNCmh0dHA6Ly9zaXRlcy5nb29nbGUuY29tL3NpdGUvaGlnaG5vcnRo aW5jDQptYWlsdG86IGJsdWVyb29mbXVzaWNAZ21haWwuY29tIDxtYWlsdG86Ymx1ZXJvb2ZtdXNp Y0BnbWFpbC5jb20+IFdpbnRlciAgNTc5IFBhcmsgUGxhY2UgIFNhbGluZSwgTUkgIDQ4MTc2ICA3 MzQtOTQ0LTAwOTQgU3VtbWVyICBQTyBCb3ggMjIxICBHcmFuZCBNYXJhaXMsIE1JIDQ5ODM5ICA5 MDYtNDk0LTI0MzQNCg0KDQoNCk9uIFR1ZSwgSmFuIDI2LCAyMDE2IGF0IDQ6NDcgUE0sIEFkYW0g TW9udHZpbGxlIDxhZGFtLncubW9udHZpbGxlQGdtYWlsLmNvbSA8bWFpbHRvOmFkYW0udy5tb250 dmlsbGVAZ21haWwuY29tPiA+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQoNCglUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHRoZSBxdWVzdGlv biwgRGFuLiAgSSB0aG91Z2h0IEkgaGFkIGVuYWJsZWQgdGltZXpvbmUgc3VwcG9ydCwgYnV0IGl0 IGFwcGVhcnMgdGhhdCBJIGRpZCAgbm90LiAgVGhlIHRpbWVzIEkgZW50ZXJlZCBhcmUgYWxsIENT VCAoVVRDLTYpLiAgDQoNCglBcG9sb2dpZXMgdG8gYWxsLiAgSXMgaXQgd29ydGh3aGlsZSB0byBy ZXN0YXJ0IHRoZSBwb2xsPw0KDQoNCgkJT24gSmFuIDI2LCAyMDE2LCBhdCA1OjA4IEFNLCBSb21h c2NhbnUsIERhbiAoRGFuKSA8ZHJvbWFzY2FAYXZheWEuY29tIDxtYWlsdG86ZHJvbWFzY2FAYXZh eWEuY29tPiA+IHdyb3RlOg0KDQoJCUFkYW0sDQoJCSANCgkJV2hhdCB0aW1lIHpvbmUgYXJlIHRo ZSB0aW1lIG9mIHRoZSBjYWxscyBleHByZXNzZWQ/DQoJCSANCgkJKGRpZCB5b3UgYWN0aXZhdGUg dGhlIHRpbWUgem9uZSBzdXBwb3J0IHdoZW4geW91IGNyZWF0ZWQgdGhlIERvb2RsZSBwb2xsPykN CgkJIA0KCQlUaGFua3MgYW5kIFJlZ2FyZHMsDQoJCSANCgkJRGFuDQoJCSANCgkJIA0KCQlGcm9t OiBzYWNtIFttYWlsdG86c2FjbS1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgQWRhbSBN b250dmlsbGUNCgkJU2VudDogTW9uZGF5LCBKYW51YXJ5IDI1LCAyMDE2IDk6MTUgUE0NCgkJVG86 IDxzYWNtQGlldGYub3JnIDxtYWlsdG86c2FjbUBpZXRmLm9yZz4gPg0KCQlTdWJqZWN0OiBbc2Fj bV0gRG9vZGxlIFBvbGwgZm9yIE1hcmNoIDIwMTYgVmlydHVhbCBJbnRlcmltDQoJCSANCgkJSGkg QWxsOg0KCQkgDQoJCUnigJl2ZSBjcmVhdGVkIGEgRG9vZGxlIHBvbGwgZm9yIHRoZSB3ZWVrIG9m IE1hcmNoIDcgaGVyZTogaHR0cDovL2Rvb2RsZS5jb20vcG9sbC9uYnJuZ2VjcHd6c21mZHl6IDxo dHRwczovL3VybGRlZmVuc2UucHJvb2Zwb2ludC5jb20vdjIvdXJsP3U9aHR0cC0zQV9fZG9vZGxl LmNvbV9wb2xsX25icm5nZWNwd3pzbWZkeXomZD1CUU1GYVEmYz1CRnBXUXc4YnN1S3BsMVNnaVpI NjRRJnI9STRkekd4UjMxT2NOWENKZlF6dmxzaUxRZnVjQlhSdWNQdmRycGhwQnNGQSZtPU83TjNE M2hVeGlYd21WRnViVXJNMWpTa1ZNYklZbG5IcGd2YnRlU0dSQlkmcz13WF9XX0dqeFJmR2lwZlNV M3RnN3VfWXJRRUFHbTJrSE9XZllzTHN5ZWc0JmU9PiAgDQoJCSANCgkJUGxlYXNlIHBhcnRpY2lw YXRlIGJlZm9yZSAyMzo1OSBVVEMgb24gRmVicnVhcnkgNy4NCgkJIA0KCQlJIGluY2x1ZGVkIG9w dGlvbnMgZm9yIHRoZSBlbnRpcmUgd2VlayB0byBhdm9pZCBoYXZpbmcgdG8gcnVuIHR3byBwb2xs cy4gIEtlZXAgaW4gbWluZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBjdXRvZmYgZm9yIElFVEYgOTUgc3VibWlzc2lvbnMg aXMgYXQgMjM6NTkgVVRDIG9uIE1hcmNoIDIxc3QsIHNvIHRoZSBsYXRlciBpbiB0aGUgd2VlayB3 ZSBtZWV0LCB0aGUgbGVzcyB0aW1lIHdl4oCZbGwgaGF2ZSB0byB1cGRhdGUgZHJhZnRzIGJlZm9y ZSBCdWVub3MgQWlyZXMuICBBbHNvIGtlZXAgaW4gbWluZCB0aGF0IGl0IHdhcyBleHByZXNzZWQg dGhhdCBlYXJsaWVyIGluIHRoZSB3ZWVrIHdvdWxkIGJlIG1vcmUgZGlmZmljdWx0IHRvIG1lZXQg Zm9yIHNvbWUgcGFydGljaXBhbnRzLg0KCQkgDQoJCUtpbmQgcmVnYXJkcywNCgkJIA0KCQlBZGFt DQoNCg0KDQoJX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18N CglzYWNtIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KCXNhY21AaWV0Zi5vcmcgPG1haWx0bzpzYWNtQGlldGYub3Jn PiANCglodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3NhY20NCgkNCgkNCg0K DQo= From nobody Wed Jan 27 01:06:20 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168771B36CB for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:06:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id itSwk5g1LF5N for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:06:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A09B1A854B for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:06:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:06:16 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453885576; bh=IdODSDoGFnrSRcA35tU1YcHhc5xWQ8Hn9Pdemt2thIE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:Subject:List-ID:List-Archive:List-Post: List-Unsubscribe:From; b=TZM7M3SSCaZ0OtHn1ApeVCXQPPicVAthydTiizD8UGJNtrU1vHbffDiLjRgEQY2eY BUoKIK98d/gSRgqSQ5Fbk4BdZprT+sRC/5FzxZH4bnVoqHlQRGStpUWUQ/4Y8gr2/L cUAerAeuZVZnNB6DSAAi9OY1NK3MQ/dRjqeW3W30= From: henkbirkholz To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a888885e546_3ea03ff1fe7d12b8180650"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: henkbirkholz X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-003: Scalability - "Large number of datagrams" (#97) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:06:19 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a888885e546_3ea03ff1fe7d12b8180650 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Taking into account event processing, a typical metric (and bottleneck) is "events that can be processed per second". I would propose to add something in the sense of "large number of datagrams (per sec)". Are there objections? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/97 ----==_mimepart_56a888885e546_3ea03ff1fe7d12b8180650 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Taking into account event processing, a typical metric (and bottleneck) is "events that can be processed per second". I would propose to add something in the sense of "large number of datagrams (per sec)". Are there objections?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a888885e546_3ea03ff1fe7d12b8180650-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 01:37:47 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6FC1B36D4 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.911 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vb3NYVfM3S4o for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1202B1A872F for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 01:37:41 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D/AQDu9qdW/yYyC4dbAxkBAQEBDwEBAQGCPiErUm0GhTSDHbIdAQ2BWwcYAQaCQIMwAoFQOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEQQEBAQEDAQEBDxs+AxsCAQgNBAQBAQsWBwchBgsUCQgCBAESCBMHh2QDEgENpQeVVA2EEAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARWGNIRqgTmBEIICIQwJEYICSxiBDwWWOUABhUWGFwGDVkqDeoMbhTyFcoEPg2+DUh4BAUKBTTQYgVBqAQGHRgF7AQEB X-IPAS-Result: A2D/AQDu9qdW/yYyC4dbAxkBAQEBDwEBAQGCPiErUm0GhTSDHbIdAQ2BWwcYAQaCQIMwAoFQOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEQQEBAQEDAQEBDxs+AxsCAQgNBAQBAQsWBwchBgsUCQgCBAESCBMHh2QDEgENpQeVVA2EEAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARWGNIRqgTmBEIICIQwJEYICSxiBDwWWOUABhUWGFwGDVkqDeoMbhTyFcoEPg2+DUh4BAUKBTTQYgVBqAQGHRgF7AQEB X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,352,1449550800"; d="scan'208,217";a="140142195" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 27 Jan 2016 04:37:38 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC04.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.14]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 27 Jan 2016 04:37:38 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC04.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.14]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:37:36 +0100 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "jarrett.lu@oracle.com" , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim Thread-Index: AQHRV6SwnmywU+d6qkOJm3zdkOks/p8No/pQgAEG74D//6n+gIAAJOSAgACixkA= Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:37:36 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <56A814AD.90405@oracle.com> In-Reply-To: <56A814AD.90405@oracle.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.48] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8AZFFEXMB04globa_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:37:46 -0000 --_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8AZFFEXMB04globa_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jarrett, I believe that it's the other way - but I may be wrong. The times I see on = the Doodle (9-11AM; 11AM - 1PM, etc.) cannot be translated in my time zone.= If Time Zone support is enabled, you have the option to change to the time= zone you will be in at the respective dates. I also prefer to discard this poll and start a new one. Thanks and Regards, Dan From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jarrett Lu Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:52 AM To: sacm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the time has been translated to y= our local time". I recall there used to a button in upper right corner tel= ling me the time zone and gave me an option to translate it to my time zone= . I don't see that option any more. I assume that is because time zone supp= ort is enabled. - Jarrett On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote: Hi Adam, YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered based on US = EST times. Cheers, - Ira Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville > wrote: Thank you for the question, Dan. I thought I had enabled timezone support,= but it appears that I did not. The times I entered are all CST (UTC-6). Apologies to all. Is it worthwhile to restart the poll? On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > wrote: Adam, What time zone are the time of the calls expressed? (did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle poll?) Thanks and Regards, Dan From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Montville Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM To: > Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim Hi All: I've created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: http://doodle.com/= poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two polls. K= eep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on Marc= h 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we'll have to updat= e drafts before Buenos Aires. Also keep in mind that it was expressed that= earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet for some participants. Kind regards, Adam _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm --_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8AZFFEXMB04globa_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Jarrett,

 <= /p>

I believe that it’s= the other way – but I may be wrong. The times I see on the Doodle (9= -11AM; 11AM – 1PM, etc.) cannot be translated in my time zone. If Tim= e Zone support is enabled, you have the option to change to the time zone yo= u will be in at the respective dates.

 <= /p>

I also prefer to discard = this poll and start a new one.

 <= /p>

Thanks and Regards,<= /o:p>

 <= /p>

Dan

 <= /p>

 <= /p>

From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jarrett Lu
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:52 AM
To: sacm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim<= /o:p>

 

It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the t= ime has been translated to your local time".  I recall there used= to a button in upper right corner telling me the time zone and gave me an = option to translate it to my time zone. I don't see that option any more. I assume that is because time zone support is enable= d.

- Jarrett


On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote:

Hi Adam,

 

YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naivel= y answered based on US EST times.

 

Cheers,

- Ira

 


Ira McDonald (Musicia= n / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.g= oogle.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.go= ogle.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: bluero= ofmusic@gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094=
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434

 

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville <= adam.w.mont= ville@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for the question, Dan.  I thought I h= ad enabled timezone support, but it appears that I did  not.  The= times I entered are all CST (UTC-6).  

 

Apologies to all.  Is it worthwhile to restart = the poll?

 

On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) &l= t;dromasca@avaya.co= m> wrote:

 

Adam,

 

What time zone are the ti= me of the calls expressed?

 

(did you activate the tim= e zone support when you created the Doodle poll?)=

 

Thanks and Regards,

 

Dan<= o:p>

 

 

From: sac= m [mailto:sacm-b= ounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Montville
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM
To: <sacm@ietf.org><= br> Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim

 

Hi All:

 

I’ve created a Doodle poll for t= he week of March 7 here: http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwz= smfdyz 

 

Please participate before 23:59 UTC on= February 7.

 

I included options for the entire week= to avoid having to run two polls.  Keep in mind that the cutoff for I= ETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we’ll have to update drafts befor= e Buenos Aires.  Also keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier = in the week would be more difficult to meet for some participants.

 

Kind regards,

 

Adam

 


_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

 




_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm=

 

--_000_9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8AZFFEXMB04globa_-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 02:31:52 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC581A037E for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:31:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jfamt41TP_I7 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:31:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com (de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.71.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F8DB1A039B for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 02:31:48 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2D8AQDu9qdW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK1JtBohRsh0BDYFiIoVtAoFQOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEQQEBAQEDEig0FwQCAQgNAQMEAQELFAkHMhQJCAEBBAESCBqHeQENpQeZcQEBAQEBAQQBAQEBAQEBAQEBAREEhjSEaoRLgyyBDwWWeQGFRYluhESDG4U8jkIeAQFCg2lqh0gBewEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: A2D8AQDu9qdW/yYyC4deGQEBAQEPAQEBAYJfK1JtBohRsh0BDYFiIoVtAoFQOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEQQEBAQEDEig0FwQCAQgNAQMEAQELFAkHMhQJCAEBBAESCBqHeQENpQeZcQEBAQEBAQQBAQEBAQEBAQEBAREEhjSEaoRLgyyBDwWWeQGFRYluhESDG4U8jkIeAQFCg2lqh0gBewEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,352,1449550800"; d="scan'208";a="140148076" Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast-smtpauth.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.38]) by de307622-de-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 27 Jan 2016 05:31:46 -0500 X-OutboundMail_SMTP: 1 Received: from unknown (HELO AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.58.13]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 27 Jan 2016 05:31:45 -0500 Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:31:35 -0500 From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: Lisa Lorenzin , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft Thread-Index: AdFX47NL6zC0PlgfTra3zFVz+OM8BQASe2cgABtCATAAFMfw8A== Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:31:34 +0000 Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9E2A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> References: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8B4A@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.48] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:31:51 -0000 Sorry. I meant #81, #82, #83. And apparently, I cannot count.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Lisa Lorenzin [mailto:llorenzin@pulsesecure.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:49 AM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); sacm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements draft >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > Sorry, you say "these two are mine" but there are four in the quoted text > (83,82,81,76). Just to make sure I understand, will you please clarify w= hich > item #s you mean? >=20 > Thanks, > Lisa >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan > (Dan) > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 6:36 AM > To: Lisa Lorenzin ; sacm@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements > draft >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Lorenzin > > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:51 AM > > To: sacm@ietf.org > > Subject: [sacm] Overview of remaining open issues for Requirements > > draft > > > > Hi all, > > > > Jim was kind enough both to create an "Addressed" label and to apply > > it to the remaining open issues as appropriate (THANK YOU!), and Adam > > was kind enough to close his open issues that were thus labeled (thank > you, as well!). > > It looks like we have seven un-addressed open issues remaining - you > > can view this list with the filter "is:issue is:open -label:Addressed". > > > > I've updated each of the github issues to try to drive towards > > resolution - here is a high-level overview: > > > > For #83 - drop G-002 - I propose that we leave as-is, as we agreed > > when this came up previously in #8 For #82 - G-001/1: what interfaces? > > - I propose that we adopt Henk's suggestion to rename G-012 to "SACM > > Component Interfaces" > > For #81 - G-001: extensions and new protocols / standard and > > proprietary - I propose that we follow the consensus on the virtual > > interim to change the SHOULD back to a MUST allowing proprietary > > extensions For #76 - T-005 Transport Reliability question #76 - I've > > proposed revised text in a github comment based on Jim's point on > unreliable network transports. >=20 > Lisa, >=20 > Those two are 'mine', and I am fine with the resolutions proposed by you. >=20 > Thanks and Regards, >=20 > Dan >=20 > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=3Dhttps- > 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_sacm&d=3DBQIFAg&c=3DBFpWQw8bsuKpl1 > SgiZH64Q&r=3DI4dzGxR31OcNXCJfQzvlsiLQfucBXRucPvdrphpBsFA&m=3DBjOd10C > Mab0-Lbspw- > szFO3EbQ8qUSkukROU_vGSmm4&s=3DXfIU_tcsnmdzjXA4rTUaXpLx82claBlgmr > -plRm5E_U&e=3D From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:42:01 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB45F1B2DEB for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kDgfEBdSryIo for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DAD41B2DEE for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:41:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:41:58 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902118; bh=TK3D55L72kflvmFhCDF9Uh1RI5f0BaFaSZGdg38pcsM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=ztczl/nQ2c/Bq56tT+YYpsp7OId8jqkIb8Mvrpu9N+0fux+5GEQEjeRWaWQI6MADl ZbZLnashvPuocV0pWh633LiweTY7UmsVwJ2K8+JMUHsdRGHDefvDbMhUP9Du5d2HcK ZOrRYmdqhtcIzxmohml12RaYiM9//RA3PwKJfvkM= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c926641ba_72593fe69e2cd2a010321c"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] requirements related to IM (#79) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:42:01 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c926641ba_72593fe69e2cd2a010321c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #79. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/79#event-528110309 ----==_mimepart_56a8c926641ba_72593fe69e2cd2a010321c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #79.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c926641ba_72593fe69e2cd2a010321c-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:42:43 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF93C1B2DEE for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wf6LzCrWcrRR for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FD121B2DF0 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:39 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902159; bh=AA6JwYySlE+PwVDeqy8HW1EVDsnep9n2LSz1OkbZE70=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=fOYRkosmyRrJE3iOxmcR47CsJr1Uetk8zV4eKXKzDlQ3y0R3IRGm//yNB3GJr0gca rgatUZH5Jl3fss/WX6iKife62x0NQ3mg8ZqdqLvWxKwdRi7umnmQR/eolyivJ7BcYV YSERkGqtD0BA9t0QHDBtZroinQAlnha+a6gERbzI= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c94f96211_1b933f99a55032b8475039"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-001/1: what interfaces? (#82) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:42:42 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c94f96211_1b933f99a55032b8475039 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #82. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/82#event-528110994 ----==_mimepart_56a8c94f96211_1b933f99a55032b8475039 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #82.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c94f96211_1b933f99a55032b8475039-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:43:00 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 209CB1B2DEB for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0RMkb5rzAKmS for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext4.iad.github.net [192.30.252.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F2EB1B2E00 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:54 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:42:53 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902173; bh=BgCBiiAiMQZvnGTldmHzn+tA3ZxqGQsKcu0nYJ33lIQ=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=johwtSyv7pYPhdAPJso0jOTso+JYhxDa4E8wbr5in3jljz4fznLooUvwcE7HiBaRs nOchMjXBekHM3nglG3bzJplNwAbAJYFH9sadNtTKBuMnaRYkQb1eVYmSrfZNbPq64o zJrZSvtqs87unGJ043XEo8erQA81OtJ9wVCJNxQA= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c95d5b6a9_21073f80df2712b8900099"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] drop G-002 (#83) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:42:59 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c95d5b6a9_21073f80df2712b8900099 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #83. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/83#event-528111209 ----==_mimepart_56a8c95d5b6a9_21073f80df2712b8900099 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #83.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c95d5b6a9_21073f80df2712b8900099-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:43:08 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF8F21B2E01 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pCI4H7lHghVr for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext6.iad.github.net [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A95B61B2E00 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:04 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:03 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902184; bh=dVtvtmg6CypQpACzRojVDfuk/0xZpL2LU2u6Fj/3StU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=QglVVEq+NjOCdeVSA9MyRSiP2QmDktmowbJ1QzEhTCuUnSrVtGwUq7fywnJ5qyRy/ Z9KA39nClFJ/8YtBp6zVudHtATqY62FkiPcne/UBl3LLYKw6mcoPOTslzAz0AzO1L8 VThcYPZYtI/9T8rRHqbXkXs+rP6ikagWbiQMsIfw= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c967e5e67_2c1b3fd3c2dc929c991886"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] title of G-004 (#84) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:43:06 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c967e5e67_2c1b3fd3c2dc929c991886 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #84. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/84#event-528111407 ----==_mimepart_56a8c967e5e67_2c1b3fd3c2dc929c991886 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #84.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c967e5e67_2c1b3fd3c2dc929c991886-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:43:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB551B2DF7 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cG-kk4LyYJty for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext6.iad.github.net [192.30.252.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D4C41B2DEB for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:21 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902201; bh=gKqdrvjJPBZnnpB8q8JIY6GgU7vXKx9Vf3hQf8zco8s=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=D/GuObgEIDQHr+8gzwj78BjfXaRLP64sg+RtWg/+YzpxIHiJGlELVOEhkP03a/9GJ XEFs7SbvWyFOGuOloGoJOA+JMk4sQIpaDdFk8KCRi4nbk6K3Z4Qzs2Q895e9sJsODO dz0w2ZDkpCd+0UwVDlZP9hlrpTCphNF2QQExRy+U= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c979804d8_1ba83f99a55032b8536591"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-008 editorial (#86) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:43:24 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c979804d8_1ba83f99a55032b8536591 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #86. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/86#event-528111679 ----==_mimepart_56a8c979804d8_1ba83f99a55032b8536591 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #86.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c979804d8_1ba83f99a55032b8536591-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:43:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736C71B2DF0 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3nqX5qBMndAO for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11EEA1B2DEF for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:34 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902214; bh=igDTiW/YtYy1ZdrbnlqJYcRJYZxL8IbA3lljZWpI3jY=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=LpD4e5nJAGapW1NfPxYG32VqIiMCIMrBqkBVb1sThYhbT208WVFUez/EZPBQmS3gI kxFnFysATqDLvpJ0GV9aqjp04QTDDvIqa1m06IUanHaBCU89usqlsEv1ORaG6SkSmh JO+dj7gX2YIrSqROdE8+g9RcPcg/rcvuzHFzxlTM= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c9867abf6_1b9e3f99a55032b8941245"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] G-011: what 'standard'? (#87) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:43:38 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9867abf6_1b9e3f99a55032b8941245 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #87. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/87#event-528111904 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9867abf6_1b9e3f99a55032b8941245 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #87.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c9867abf6_1b9e3f99a55032b8941245-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:43:57 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93CCE1B2E13 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E-sIrXW-A7V3 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C1381B2DEB for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:43:52 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902232; bh=R9cat39belnLaS3ZH+RmXbzRQANIRSMGS0Rp3GoJZAc=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=FsAYZioy2DWOhHhUDJJ1pWWiinpBVwz7PdyGAnpM0QcsBMcBB9YmFZdR68AHKujdV tOJvgWwds17cuCWknrj0mPCnDFu0QH4hfdLkZVdEkJXPoDZC0vg8KPQ7qhle9k+XJ8 K0cHraol8VPmvAgZzWItMhmuvUq4Qkc9pxOQ7erk= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c998aa421_3f4e3fe3211dd2bc9520b5"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] ARCH-005: capitalization (#89) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:43:55 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c998aa421_3f4e3fe3211dd2bc9520b5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #89. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/89#event-528112194 ----==_mimepart_56a8c998aa421_3f4e3fe3211dd2bc9520b5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #89.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c998aa421_3f4e3fe3211dd2bc9520b5-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:44:07 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866AA1B2E12 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Kj2IV_rBGcH7 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2529C1B2E09 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:04 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902244; bh=mcOxrAbPJ38YrmByTKE/XDLp/lRThS+exYZaJilwNbY=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=Fvv2V7cjvBuXi2p1dmdTE5L/ZHWT8ldTOEtf7jpKn2pDuuG5L7u/uqHluGlkdi9mK qBDflGxhA6lTycFYeOdFV6N+t7DCD6uDMT3sXiFV1jvUCGJbvRDa1YTMUsuGCrw6MF AoT1rDWib5ebeVg/ZlfBntNj2BH2z5bbax8zZ/YA= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c9a477336_2b573fd3c2dc929c7265bc"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] IM-003: text clarifications (#90) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:44:06 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9a477336_2b573fd3c2dc929c7265bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #90. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/90#event-528112376 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9a477336_2b573fd3c2dc929c7265bc Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #90.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c9a477336_2b573fd3c2dc929c7265bc-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:44:28 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C88A1B2E10 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kWIUSuZtZvJT for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CEEC1B2E09 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:20 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902260; bh=PDpFh4/gbRiVuECMsJXVWWJ0F9YLerNIjbaXwcimFUU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=UxsdJ1hOmnCEdGxyPUoYueEYWeUy7xmlPV4xTOHqHq4wUN6BU3H22SB6h+UZZkdcT /YIFvKjAaVoTKT/GLRoHk/vJm/7W6tREkQUsxNYzPGG/W+W7m00DUoKzO+7r/oYybT x/pXvVnYy7dqLllEl1BYf9fY3JYP5R+vE4k3gtZE= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c9b45dd06_19d3fdb9fcb72c074291f"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] OP-006: name (#92) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:44:26 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9b45dd06_19d3fdb9fcb72c074291f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #92. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/92#event-528112659 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9b45dd06_19d3fdb9fcb72c074291f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #92.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c9b45dd06_19d3fdb9fcb72c074291f-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 05:44:39 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1B921B2E10 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WYDB7xLIFK5g for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADF861B2E07 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:36 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 05:44:36 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453902276; bh=cVSXhQOD9/o3atR3SgrskBvebnEMrUtYDEOjDxDjbJU=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=NI3kliHLJa6AGq87ovWaBXRl3A8XBKX+nJEEJr8nGoDBWts4X3SRi66B0MZImAFez sx5r7eL4mxkDELmvXLqMaOf96hAazJIfPBsrPEuV5q+xEV6BAgKb6XcR3kgueZKFBi pmHfU0t5K9uh5w8QlMQYMTYtxY/mhSWXu4ToljpU= From: dromasca To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a8c9c4c261_2c0d3fd3c2dc929c36147f"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: dromasca X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] T0003: MUST cannot be optional (#93) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 13:44:38 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9c4c261_2c0d3fd3c2dc929c36147f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Closed #93. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/93#event-528112968 ----==_mimepart_56a8c9c4c261_2c0d3fd3c2dc929c36147f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Closed #93.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a8c9c4c261_2c0d3fd3c2dc929c36147f-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 07:01:23 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5D71B2EAD for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ggTTmKM13OHx for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oi0-x234.google.com (mail-oi0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E5FA1B2F27 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi0-x234.google.com with SMTP id o124so6779101oia.3 for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to:mime-version; bh=lAK69IWfLXNwFSssVL+h/a6R6HJCs40VCN4l2eZ05cM=; b=VxunbCkd8pEY0NOw8+3KFAk08jjc5Ldk3wReOUlC5joJkXi/qWTieMmJxcjg60PaL+ Plh/ND/BT+EFbaKF+FxFXt3guJn+J5sJGsqC9l2CpbBm25JZNNOOnAkLsGe6SnBs8bin 3+BmGSZ+mvBBnXuN0FnaNS095n9xWZQ46rBmkUV2pLRHil6VioFx3Qsz6xG8Zs7uTPMu 5a3rGwOjbfaWUFsLIzUmRPw0VaW5LrVHSbj4SgASl/YVQ5C2wii4xASwjv+Y7ITv6+aJ zi5Gfsu7gdoim9pWsyz2V5a7JZ5zFJgQVOEkODUF2RSyeF5wdFv6bzok8uIPBlZzwXRn Q2ug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:subject:message-id:date:to :mime-version; bh=lAK69IWfLXNwFSssVL+h/a6R6HJCs40VCN4l2eZ05cM=; b=h1RHVU6dTqof/ja5fOazJjCjk9qRUj3CmBmCdEbuxmnldhpRNLKjxymVz/bTy1/kwF M8/HrWH0rGQ2vwWHvTuI3gkIlr9nGHubVIaKKT/cD/HChW/nS28/pyEXU4Y9UpTfZkrx KS73X7fgVvF2cTB+sH6uBjY0QzvmcZFJY1I0KIQ58Unki5BcPqyOYxz2xwFdiDaj1546 i3OkLX5IyBY07wDGanOKm5q+rPmyDjste/co/3Xw+FvrzuS3kw8r5sncEB/6eM0rucTV MUR1L7527VSU6g8ojaROKpi82DW95FJ+IGQQdKBMlAw7iyfkRQbPR2ogKlK3BvQefXuG NOww== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTNNEoTTGjFjdi75FRec/gndKJ7sYFJfKZvUIysYFMfXAs2eV3G2QpKG/mw0dec/A== X-Received: by 10.202.104.35 with SMTP id d35mr21468200oic.128.1453906865621; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mac-b8e856453bf0.attlocal.net (99-64-100-131.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net. [99.64.100.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t74sm3038850oie.21.2016.01.27.07.01.04 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 07:01:04 -0800 (PST) From: Adam Montville Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AA435225-5797-4408-9169-313CBC6B5C50" Message-Id: <7C3A6865-FE25-462C-A654-5A96F47EBE01@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:01:02 -0600 To: "" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] UPDATED: Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 15:01:16 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_AA435225-5797-4408-9169-313CBC6B5C50 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi All: I have created a NEW Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: = http://doodle.com/poll/q6vwrpaaadx2xhgb = The old Doodle poll has been deleted. Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 9, so a selection can be = made on February 10. I apologize for the confusion, and I have explicitly enabled timezone = support in this poll. Kind regards, Adam= --Apple-Mail=_AA435225-5797-4408-9169-313CBC6B5C50 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Hi All:

I have created a NEW Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: http://doodle.com/poll/q6vwrpaaadx2xhgb

The old Doodle poll has been deleted.

Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 9, so a selection can be made on February 10.

I apologize for the confusion, and I have explicitly enabled timezone support in this poll.

Kind regards,

Adam
--Apple-Mail=_AA435225-5797-4408-9169-313CBC6B5C50-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 09:27:25 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE33C1ACE6B for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:27:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.212 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.212 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Bd-Q8FAN_yo for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1354E1ACE8B for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u0RHRHDY022802 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:27:17 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0RHRGFN011230 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:27:17 GMT Received: from abhmp0006.oracle.com (abhmp0006.oracle.com [141.146.116.12]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u0RHRGeo013252; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:27:16 GMT Received: from [10.132.149.61] (/10.132.149.61) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:27:16 -0800 References: <9F021C8F-16A0-481C-91CB-F3DF7938AB20@gmail.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF8959@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <56A814AD.90405@oracle.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "sacm@ietf.org" From: Jarrett Lu Message-ID: <56A8FDF6.7080404@oracle.com> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:27:18 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BEF9BD8@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020508020004060006090105" X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: jarrett.lu@oracle.com List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:27:24 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020508020004060006090105 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Dan, I believe you and Lisa have the correct understanding of doole poll behavior. I'm glad the poll is restarted. Thanks. - Jarrett On 1/27/2016 1:37 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > > Hi Jarrett, > > I believe that it’s the other way – but I may be wrong. The times I > see on the Doodle (9-11AM; 11AM – 1PM, etc.) cannot be translated in > my time zone. If Time Zone support is enabled, you have the option to > change to the time zone you will be in at the respective dates. > > I also prefer to discard this poll and start a new one. > > Thanks and Regards, > > Dan > > *From:*sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Jarrett Lu > *Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:52 AM > *To:* sacm@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim > > It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the time has been translated > to your local time". I recall there used to a button in upper right > corner telling me the time zone and gave me an option to translate it > to my time zone. I don't see that option any more. I assume that is > because time zone support is enabled. > > - Jarrett > > > On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote: > > Hi Adam, > > YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered > based on US EST times. > > Cheers, > > - Ira > > > Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) > Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG > Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG > Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group > Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG > IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB > Blue Roof Music / High North Inc > http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic > > http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc > > mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com > Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 > Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434 > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville > > > wrote: > > Thank you for the question, Dan. I thought I had enabled timezone > support, but it appears that I did not. The times I entered are > all CST (UTC-6). > > Apologies to all. Is it worthwhile to restart the poll? > > On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > > wrote: > > Adam, > > What time zone are the time of the calls expressed? > > (did you activate the time zone support when you created the > Doodle poll?) > > Thanks and Regards, > > Dan > > *From:* sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of > *Adam Montville > *Sent:* Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM > *To:* > > *Subject:* [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim > > Hi All: > > I’ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: > http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz > > > > Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7. > > I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run > two polls. Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 > submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the > week we meet, the less time we’ll have to update drafts before > Buenos Aires. Also keep in mind that it was expressed that > earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet for some > participants. > > Kind regards, > > Adam > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sacm mailing list > > sacm@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm > > --------------020508020004060006090105 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hi Dan,

I believe you and Lisa have the correct understanding of doole poll behavior. I'm glad the poll is restarted.

Thanks.

- Jarrett

On 1/27/2016 1:37 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:

Hi Jarrett,

 

I believe that it’s the other way – but I may be wrong. The times I see on the Doodle (9-11AM; 11AM – 1PM, etc.) cannot be translated in my time zone. If Time Zone support is enabled, you have the option to change to the time zone you will be in at the respective dates.

 

I also prefer to discard this poll and start a new one.

 

Thanks and Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jarrett Lu
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 2:52 AM
To: sacm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim

 

It'd be nice if doole poll has a message "the time has been translated to your local time".  I recall there used to a button in upper right corner telling me the time zone and gave me an option to translate it to my time zone. I don't see that option any more. I assume that is because time zone support is enabled.

- Jarrett


On 1/26/2016 2:39 PM, Ira McDonald wrote:

Hi Adam,

 

YES - please discard and restart the poll - I naively answered based on US EST times.

 

Cheers,

- Ira

 


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434

 

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam Montville <adam.w.montville@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for the question, Dan.  I thought I had enabled timezone support, but it appears that I did  not.  The times I entered are all CST (UTC-6).  

 

Apologies to all.  Is it worthwhile to restart the poll?

 

On Jan 26, 2016, at 5:08 AM, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <dromasca@avaya.com> wrote:

 

Adam,

 

What time zone are the time of the calls expressed?

 

(did you activate the time zone support when you created the Doodle poll?)

 

Thanks and Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adam Montville
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 9:15 PM
To: <sacm@ietf.org>
Subject: [sacm] Doodle Poll for March 2016 Virtual Interim

 

Hi All:

 

I’ve created a Doodle poll for the week of March 7 here: http://doodle.com/poll/nbrngecpwzsmfdyz 

 

Please participate before 23:59 UTC on February 7.

 

I included options for the entire week to avoid having to run two polls.  Keep in mind that the cutoff for IETF 95 submissions is at 23:59 UTC on March 21st, so the later in the week we meet, the less time we’ll have to update drafts before Buenos Aires.  Also keep in mind that it was expressed that earlier in the week would be more difficult to meet for some participants.

 

Kind regards,

 

Adam

 


_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

 




_______________________________________________
sacm mailing list
sacm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm

 


--------------020508020004060006090105-- From nobody Wed Jan 27 10:05:42 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49D721AD49F for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:05:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.941 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.941 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_12=2.059, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5q7UvprDniRz for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:05:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext3.iad.github.net [192.30.252.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBA101AD47E for ; Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:05:37 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:05:36 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453917936; bh=QD7cNvD9vrDKeldXlTKSYjfzEsBeS6NdU0u5oRwBgDs=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=nTGUPtqZ+XmsfJfiAhKZxSNMbTFAAylGDF5WlexfXY3zG5PCJ74XCqkvd1g8UOI6m j+GTGw+X9ZShWxPJruNPbn5vkQjgJA4goE5FC/lAQD089DEWuS67wPc+IQXZ9f7Y4S drwpH8tXqLCM6LQjNXh6R/7DBIoSSJPs/JMsgULw= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56a906f08a3fb_67123ff6ca4a729c1396d5"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 18:05:40 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56a906f08a3fb_67123ff6ca4a729c1396d5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If all you assign is an internal DB index, then you've got insufficient data to discover a "same as" relationship. We need to support reasonably deterministic endpoint identity matching, wherever that needs to be articulated. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-175775566 ----==_mimepart_56a906f08a3fb_67123ff6ca4a729c1396d5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

If all you assign is an internal DB index, then you've got insufficient data to discover a "same as" relationship. We need to support reasonably deterministic endpoint identity matching, wherever that needs to be articulated.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56a906f08a3fb_67123ff6ca4a729c1396d5-- From nobody Thu Jan 28 05:20:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED20C1A1AE6 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:20:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ohoshBY65CGA for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:20:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2b-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext2.iad.github.net [192.30.252.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82C1D1A1A50 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:20:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:20:02 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1453987202; bh=Qwgb0wGwwMy+X8n/k9QNkESkvETapvM6PBrH4OUrAqY=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=XZHXmCu05zT1OuHQtwPi6lms0zZuAUnFqTWKFpql7O0P29kXiCDIsP7A4QN79QjvL x46faVQZCNy/DBtETbtiGgqMhdgd/ZuhG/OGhtXB3sB9sGiHH55S+pNESAJVI7IUTv 6Ky4ojc0j8kX4AkbWiDxH19MQKh6p9h51bw6cQoA= From: adammontville To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56aa158272fa5_10593f926904b2b87210"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: adammontville X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:20:06 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56aa158272fa5_10593f926904b2b87210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit No, that's not at all what I'm advocating. Did you perhaps misread "insufficient" as "sufficient"? I want to ensure that our requirements don't make it hard for disparate implementations to reconcile endpoint data between each other. Wherever this sort of thing is best described in our documentation, is fine by me. Lisa had suggested that these were aligned with DM requirements and you had disagreed. This is about where this conversation stands at this point, and I'd like to try and wrap it up so we can move ahed. As I said before, I think we need to support reasonably deterministic endpoint identity matching. I think Lisa agreed that this would be critical for SACM. Further, the points you made in your last comment are those that I believe support the need for us to say as much as possible when it comes to how endpoints can be matched. You mention all the attributes we can look at and use to _infer_ the match. What are those relationships? How many valid assertions do we need before we are confident in the match? Which assertions matter? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-176183217 ----==_mimepart_56aa158272fa5_10593f926904b2b87210 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

No, that's not at all what I'm advocating. Did you perhaps misread "insufficient" as "sufficient"?

I want to ensure that our requirements don't make it hard for disparate implementations to reconcile endpoint data between each other. Wherever this sort of thing is best described in our documentation, is fine by me.

Lisa had suggested that these were aligned with DM requirements and you had disagreed. This is about where this conversation stands at this point, and I'd like to try and wrap it up so we can move ahed. As I said before, I think we need to support reasonably deterministic endpoint identity matching. I think Lisa agreed that this would be critical for SACM.

Further, the points you made in your last comment are those that I believe support the need for us to say as much as possible when it comes to how endpoints can be matched. You mention all the attributes we can look at and use to infer the match. What are those relationships? How many valid assertions do we need before we are confident in the match? Which assertions matter?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56aa158272fa5_10593f926904b2b87210-- From nobody Thu Jan 28 10:24:50 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F1E1B2F07 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:24:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.454 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.454 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20=1.546, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KxxxFmb6naH9 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:24:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0A1D1B2F14 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:24:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:24:45 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1454005485; bh=pAEifH+SqZ+gd5p04BVFhfdvnCBkZFNJcRJuVLuBGXE=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=dHLxs4GBsZV0FiVqvfVcXFtJRMa5CQ2clV/td34OnNPJJ81cok1bVoZryhyI4tWBW zc//KfVXRIkzJLiJcAsagKv6LAKtS+CQgz3aIj3VJXC6aRPl3wNgzKI6ha/VNL2fZz HUQa7uAVZ1xfKHUV9JXIRf7053Q3NM0NU6sDyQ7o= From: Jim Schaad To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56aa5cedab49e_27143fee8c2332b8592909d"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:24:49 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56aa5cedab49e_27143fee8c2332b8592909d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Adam, If there is a requirement here, and I am not convinced that there is, then it would appear to be a requirement on the IM and not the DM. The requirement would run along the lines of - All of the elements of the SACM standard endpoint matching algorithm MUST be in the IM. I think that this would be a real problem for the WG if it was not the case and is therefore not needed. Gunnar, Does this mean that as a vendor I cannot define additional attributes in my DM which would allow me to produce a better result than the standard SACM matching algorithm? This would violate the apparent requirement that you have stated for reproducibility. My vendor specific algorithm would not match the standard SACM algorithm in this case. Based on what you are saying, there needs to be a milestone for an endpoint matching algorithm draft. This might be part of the IM document, but it would probably be better starting separately. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-176322218 ----==_mimepart_56aa5cedab49e_27143fee8c2332b8592909d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Adam, If there is a requirement here, and I am not convinced that there is, then it would appear to be a requirement on the IM and not the DM. The requirement would run along the lines of - All of the elements of the SACM standard endpoint matching algorithm MUST be in the IM. I think that this would be a real problem for the WG if it was not the case and is therefore not needed.

Gunnar, Does this mean that as a vendor I cannot define additional attributes in my DM which would allow me to produce a better result than the standard SACM matching algorithm? This would violate the apparent requirement that you have stated for reproducibility. My vendor specific algorithm would not match the standard SACM algorithm in this case.

Based on what you are saying, there needs to be a milestone for an endpoint matching algorithm draft. This might be part of the IM document, but it would probably be better starting separately.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56aa5cedab49e_27143fee8c2332b8592909d-- From nobody Thu Jan 28 10:27:35 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B121B2F2A for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:27:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.349 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_08=1.651, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Y9Lg4beQ1VS for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:27:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext5.iad.github.net [192.30.252.196]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B0D81B2F29 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:27:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:27:31 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1454005651; bh=3WQRn92xdopouw+mxpS0lQiyn/sYWSatfTQSmb7CGzM=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=i9JmxZlCYJDMwgXZpJSo4k2D1ff4Zx2gB7Er//5dwFPcSMZs/e1gLHbMJLMDHhu2B YTYmuMuFHjSXuJSwog6p2/6a2/CbRsI+eeBW/zpBGBJQY1ljCPPmTVA0nu5ccieGeC LbV+H9R76a5TTyR2yvLr1TfCtsDAbkrtdN19Zhy4= From: Jim Schaad To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56aa5d93dace6_7edf3faa1b2012a02166984"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: jimsch X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] T-005 Transport Reliability question (#76) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:27:33 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56aa5d93dace6_7edf3faa1b2012a02166984 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Wordy but works --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/76#issuecomment-176323818 ----==_mimepart_56aa5d93dace6_7edf3faa1b2012a02166984 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Wordy but works

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56aa5d93dace6_7edf3faa1b2012a02166984-- From nobody Thu Jan 28 11:44:58 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 388351A1BE7 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:44:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_16=1.092, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zccI6OSZrGcq for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:44:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from github-smtp2a-ext-cp1-prd.iad.github.net (github-smtp2-ext7.iad.github.net [192.30.252.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B92AD1A1B51 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:44:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:44:51 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=github.com; s=pf2014; t=1454010291; bh=h1wm1U7gX3TGu66RV7qoBH9DbZDjbMQ+zVVpt5cyTX4=; h=From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:List-ID: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Unsubscribe:From; b=gnCLX+eotK1e76RFRciM0qjuUCPG1cfgWYpMm60+3kxi+8mshtQj7JqMqRLoTYYvm rqMBphz06pn26vkL7ZFEjterGNCHswp9HKsjtK7vy3E/wX9b9IDMcv48XmAcyC7oMx fLfNHjxHec9d6Rxh1AhrPj4LjB2bhZVVM2bBIzkc= From: GunnarEngelbach To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_56aa6fb358cb2_26653fb37ac2929c829862f"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list X-GitHub-Sender: GunnarEngelbach X-GitHub-Recipient: sacm X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All X-GitHub-Recipient-Address: sacm@ietf.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [draft-ietf-sacm-requirements] Matching Algorithms (#73) X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Reply-To: sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 19:44:56 -0000 ----==_mimepart_56aa6fb358cb2_26653fb37ac2929c829862f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim, I think allowance has to be made for both. A standard algorithm is necessary for interoperability, but implementors need to have the option to use proprietary methods to account for usages not covered by the standard algorithm, because the standard isn't as likely to keep pace with changes, because the standard algorithm might be incorrect in some edge cases, etc. An alternative would be that attribute-based endpoint matching be an MTI service available as part of a SACM deployment. Id est, some node in the SACM infrastructure provides a public service of indicating whether or not two sets of endpoint attributes refer to the same endpoint or not. But that has some serious drawbacks as well. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-requirements/issues/73#issuecomment-176369535 ----==_mimepart_56aa6fb358cb2_26653fb37ac2929c829862f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Jim,

I think allowance has to be made for both. A standard algorithm is necessary for interoperability, but implementors need to have the option to use proprietary methods to account for usages not covered by the standard algorithm, because the standard isn't as likely to keep pace with changes, because the standard algorithm might be incorrect in some edge cases, etc.

An alternative would be that attribute-based endpoint matching be an MTI service available as part of a SACM deployment. Id est, some node in the SACM infrastructure provides a public service of indicating whether or not two sets of endpoint attributes refer to the same endpoint or not. But that has some serious drawbacks as well.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

----==_mimepart_56aa6fb358cb2_26653fb37ac2929c829862f-- From nobody Thu Jan 28 14:43:40 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB5521ACEE0 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:43:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7_wXirgBf1Dw for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:43:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp2.pacifier.net (smtp2.pacifier.net [64.255.237.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B2E01ACED0 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:43:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from hebrews (unknown [12.185.22.226]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jimsch@nwlink.com) by smtp2.pacifier.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA9262C9C5 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:43:36 -0800 (PST) From: "Jim Schaad" To: Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 14:41:01 -0800 Message-ID: <063001d15a1c$f74a97a0$e5dfc6e0$@augustcellars.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AdFaG1PdsEXBpK8xRTeNzZzq1n/Ndw== Archived-At: Subject: [sacm] Matching Algorithm Requirements X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 22:43:39 -0000 There has been a discussion on matching algorithms with respect to the requirements draft. I would like to get feedback for myself on what the requirements of this matching algorithm is supposed to be doing. To that end I would like to start with some questions. 1. What are the targets that a matching algorithm are supposed to match? One target is going to be endpoints (for some definition of endpoints). However are there other targets that need to be matched as well? Do we match Software packages? SACM components? 2. What are the outputs of the matching algorithm? Is it a binary YES/NO? Is it some type of confidence level? 90% confidence match? Are there historical notations? Yesterday I would have said that they matched, but today I say they do not match. 3. The Friday morning cabal was talking about matching algorithms at one point, I did not always read the minutes from that group, however did they ever come up with the basics/starting point for this algorithm so we can start discussing what it does or does not do and what it is based on from the IM? 4. Is the matching algorithm restricted to just the inputs given to it, or is it allowed to perform additional queries of SACM entities to get more data. If it gets more data, is it restricted to the ACLS of the questor? If it is not restricted are there security problems? If it is restricted and there reproducibility problems? 5. Are there currently any matching algorithms from the prospective solution space that the SACM group needs to be looking at? Jim From nobody Thu Jan 28 17:06:38 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietf.org Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E391B2AB8; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:49:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Meeting Session Request Tool\"" To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160128234920.29648.26001.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:49:20 -0800 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 17:06:36 -0800 Cc: sacm-chairs@ietf.org, Kathleen.Moriarty.ietf@gmail.com, sacm@ietf.org, adam.w.montville@gmail.com Subject: [sacm] sacm - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 95 X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:49:20 -0000 A new meeting session request has just been submitted by Adam W. Montville, a Chair of the sacm working group. --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Security Automation and Continuous Monitoring Area Name: Security Area Session Requester: Adam Montville Number of Sessions: 2 Length of Session(s): 2.5 Hours, 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 50 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: core anima dots i2nsf tcpinc supa httpauth oauth radext dime ace 6tisch scim jose ipsecme tls netmod netconf opsec saag mile xrblock lmap i2rs dane cose Special Requests: I am (I think) resubmitting because I did not see my original request. We'd ideally like to meet on Monday and Thurs/Friday. --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Fri Jan 29 13:28:59 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D50F1B3483 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:28:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.501 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l9qUIyk349BK for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:28:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from ukel19pa19.eemsg.mail.mil (ukel19pa19.eemsg.mail.mil [214.24.22.87]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9059B1B3467 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:28:54 -0800 (PST) X-EEMSG-Attachment-filename: smime.p7s Received: from edge-mech01.mail.mil ([214.21.130.101]) by ukel19pa19.eemsg.mail.mil with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2016 21:28:53 +0000 Received: from UMECHPAOJ.easf.csd.disa.mil (214.21.130.37) by edge-mech01.mail.mil (214.21.130.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.266.1; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 21:28:53 +0000 Received: from UMECHPAO0.easf.csd.disa.mil ([169.254.4.71]) by umechpaoj.easf.csd.disa.mil ([214.21.130.37]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 21:28:52 +0000 From: "Wolfkiel, Joseph L CIV DISA ID (US)" To: Jim Schaad , "sacm@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Non-DoD Source] [sacm] Matching Algorithm Requirements Thread-Index: AdFaG1PdsEXBpK8xRTeNzZzq1n/NdwAvk1ZQ Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 21:28:52 +0000 Message-ID: <9F61CC8E6ED7BC4DBA90C13F25D29C006E728B2D@umechpao0.easf.csd.disa.mil> References: <063001d15a1c$f74a97a0$e5dfc6e0$@augustcellars.com> In-Reply-To: <063001d15a1c$f74a97a0$e5dfc6e0$@augustcellars.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [214.21.44.12] Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=SHA1; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_03A6_01D15AB2.00874A80" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] [Non-DoD Source] Matching Algorithm Requirements X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 21:28:57 -0000 ------=_NextPart_000_03A6_01D15AB2.00874A80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My opinions: 1. What are the targets that a matching algorithm are supposed to match? One target is going to be endpoints (for some definition of endpoints). However are there other targets that need to be matched as well? Do we match Software packages? SACM components? I would expect the primary matching algorithm to address matching IP networked device endpoints between SACM data collectors and within the same data collector at different points in time. Matching applications and patches is also of concern. For example if the same application installs on Windows, Linux, Solaris, IOS, and other operating systems using different names, can a SACM system tell that the deployed instances are all instances of the same application? I would treat this as a separate problem given the SWID overlap. 2. What are the outputs of the matching algorithm? Is it a binary YES/NO? Is it some type of confidence level? 90% confidence match? Are there historical notations? Yesterday I would have said that they matched, but today I say they do not match. I like the confidence level approach, but it will ultimately probably need to be treated as a binary. The way the matching algorithms I've designed work is to rank different matching criteria in order of confidence (ordinal, not cardinal) and establish a cutoff on which matches will be used to combine data from different sensors into the same endpoint record. I generally worry more about the history in terms of when were the matching attributes collected. For example an two IP addresses, collected on the same network within 10 minutes of each other would be a much better indicator of a matching endpoint than IP addresses collected 7 days apart. 3. The Friday morning cabal was talking about matching algorithms at one point, I did not always read the minutes from that group, however did they ever come up with the basics/starting point for this algorithm so we can start discussing what it does or does not do and what it is based on from the IM? I'm not sure if they (we?) ever did. I'm happy to share the matching algorithms we've used in the DoD, along with the cases where they didn't work. I'd offer to "contribute" the algorithms, but not sure I'm up to that level of effort. 4. Is the matching algorithm restricted to just the inputs given to it, or is it allowed to perform additional queries of SACM entities to get more data. If it gets more data, is it restricted to the ACLS of the questor? If it is not restricted are there security problems? If it is restricted and there reproducibility problems? I would restrict it to just the inputs provided. Building additional complexity might make the problem close to unsolvable. 5. Are there currently any matching algorithms from the prospective solution space that the SACM group needs to be looking at? Not sure who gets to decide this. Joseph L. Wolfkiel SCM Engineering Lead DISA ID52 Fort Meade DISA Acquisiton Bldg Cube A4A58E Work: (301) 225-8820 Gov Cell: (571) 814-8231 Joseph.L.Wolfkiel.civ@mail.mil -----Original Message----- From: sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jim Schaad Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 5:41 PM To: sacm@ietf.org Subject: [Non-DoD Source] [sacm] Matching Algorithm Requirements There has been a discussion on matching algorithms with respect to the requirements draft. I would like to get feedback for myself on what the requirements of this matching algorithm is supposed to be doing. To that end I would like to start with some questions. 1. What are the targets that a matching algorithm are supposed to match? One target is going to be endpoints (for some definition of endpoints). However are there other targets that need to be matched as well? Do we match Software packages? SACM components? 2. What are the outputs of the matching algorithm? Is it a binary YES/NO? Is it some type of confidence level? 90% confidence match? Are there historical notations? Yesterday I would have said that they matched, but today I say they do not match. 3. The Friday morning cabal was talking about matching algorithms at one point, I did not always read the minutes from that group, however did they ever come up with the basics/starting point for this algorithm so we can start discussing what it does or does not do and what it is based on from the IM? 4. Is the matching algorithm restricted to just the inputs given to it, or is it allowed to perform additional queries of SACM entities to get more data. If it gets more data, is it restricted to the ACLS of the questor? If it is not restricted are there security problems? If it is restricted and there reproducibility problems? 5. Are there currently any matching algorithms from the prospective solution space that the SACM group needs to be looking at? Jim _______________________________________________ sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org Caution-https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm ------=_NextPart_000_03A6_01D15AB2.00874A80 Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIISlTCCA3Aw ggJYoAMCAQICAQUwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwWzELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxGDAWBgNVBAoTD1UuUy4g R292ZXJubWVudDEMMAoGA1UECxMDRG9EMQwwCgYDVQQLEwNQS0kxFjAUBgNVBAMTDURvRCBSb290 IENBIDIwHhcNMDQxMjEzMTUwMDEwWhcNMjkxMjA1MTUwMDEwWjBbMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYG A1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEWMBQGA1UE AxMNRG9EIFJvb3QgQ0EgMjCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMAswfaNO6z/ PzzWcb64dCIH7HBBFfyrQOMHqsHD2J/+2kw6vz/I2Ch7SzYBwKxFJcPSDgqPhRhkED0aE3Aqb47X 3I2Ts0EPOCHNravCPSoF01cRNw3NjFH5k+PMRkkhjhS0zcsUPjjNcjHuqxLyZeo0LlZd/+5jdctt upE0/J7z9C0cvlDEQt9ZiP9qs/qobD3LVnFxBZa7n4DlgEVZZ0Gw68OtYKSAdQYXnA70Q+CZDhv7 f/WzzLKBgrH9MsG4vkGkZLVgOlpRMIzO3kEsGUdcSRBkuXSph0GvfW66wbihv2UxOgRn+bW7jpKK AGO4seaMOF+D/1DVO6Jda7IQzGMCAwEAAaM/MD0wHQYDVR0OBBYEFEl0uwxeunr+AlTve6DGlcYJ gHCWMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIBhjAPBgNVHRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCYkY0/ ici79cBpcyk7Nay6swh2PXAJkumERCEBfRR2G+5RbB2NFTctezFp9JpEuK9GzDT6I8sDJxnSgyF1 K+fgG5km3IRAleio0sz2WFxm7z9KlxCCHboKot1bBiudp2RO6y4BNaS0PxOtVeTVc6hpmxHxmPIx Hm9A1Ph4n46RoG9wBJBmqgYrzuF6krV94eDRluehOi3MsZ0fBUTth5nTTRpwOcEEDOV+2fGv1yAO 8SJ6JaRzmcw/pAcnlqiile2CuRbTnguHwsHyiPVi32jfx7xpUe2xXNxUVCkPCTmarAPB2wxNrm8K ehZJ8b+R0jiU0/aVLLdsyUK2jcqQjYXZMIIEvDCCA6SgAwIBAgIDScrmMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUA MF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNVBAsTA0RvRDEM MAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMzAwHhcNMTMxMDIzMDAwMDAwWhcN MTYwOTI1MjM1OTU5WjB5MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQww CgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTENMAsGA1UECxMERElTQTElMCMGA1UEAxMcV09MRktJ RUwuSk9TRVBILkwuMTE3ODkyNDA0MDCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAKsw st9Q8C7pW1taRPZ+xHaNeI3CdIn4F7IJikOSr27UnwmyXZzXdVnJqeEk9KrSKbDAGEqvwK/G/fjT IVcN+2oIqllCY6XpziPmEtnnrej2JRe0wgAckH50lLhfUIwABW8QXU0i6csvryNUtC3eOg1E+hWM N8Gkx+HdMaFuYxfYTB2LysZRRUu6xXjSNc/SIHmRGtPimbEgtrpwOpytdh5ojFVW/yrIJmZ1Ej1L IFIsdSMXxblnD/opeT9sCdFHXpy02sAgTH0ciH7zxKtYtllYMSMac8YGld1GOt9GbFjgAPfJy50Z GhgJ2dEE3zsWEYQynQK47nkZi09JXhxRMK0CAwEAAaOCAWcwggFjMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFDVhZigJ vFYlW4vMv4FeYSwwOdMhMDoGA1UdHwQzMDEwL6AtoCuGKWh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZGlzYS5taWwvY3Js L0RPREVNQUlMQ0FfMzAuY3JsMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIFIDAjBgNVHSAEHDAaMAsGCWCGSAFlAgEL CTALBglghkgBZQIBCxMwHQYDVR0OBBYEFJtzaaaG5JC35TsiFQ4qK5xS5mQCMGgGCCsGAQUFBwEB BFwwWjA2BggrBgEFBQcwAoYqaHR0cDovL2NybC5kaXNhLm1pbC9zaWduL0RPREVNQUlMQ0FfMzAu Y2VyMCAGCCsGAQUFBzABhhRodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5kaXNhLm1pbDApBgNVHREEIjAggR5KT1NFUEgu TC5XT0xGS0lFTC5DSVZATUFJTC5NSUwwGwYDVR0JBBQwEjAQBggrBgEFBQcJBDEEEwJVUzANBgkq hkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEArgEbQvltVDKnlZ7eoFEjhn6DViXxCZBfiI5Q74uif1fzd2fWdNrhbLx9 cFe4ZP3HjvLNCatEaLt3+qNaRXcnyJejsDCrHAQm+Oy+vsxdquTV8eicXbkC77lTtpZWVgliv5XL GvaPsiNmlJIl9MM9diAPkMgWBGgEfgJyQGf9/wkyNmQK3K+l9qOVC+Cu/fbiSnhX/uIICFO9ZjoL n7vdZO9CzRkZhRlniZhZ6efJnzISQjEaJdm+ntMUuudUW5686Sgk1QdF7DLzDODvjwrzUlbGhoiH nvqDzYCWXjkQfQJ6Q9t9rcZSh/1Xcc7SgRXJYJSEKOs1whOzryAkGpKG7zCCBQcwggPvoAMCAQIC A0nK4zANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBdMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5t ZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEYMBYGA1UEAxMPRE9EIEVNQUlMIENBLTMw MB4XDTEzMTAyMzAwMDAwMFoXDTE2MDkyNTIzNTk1OVoweTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxGDAWBgNVBAoT D1UuUy4gR292ZXJubWVudDEMMAoGA1UECxMDRG9EMQwwCgYDVQQLEwNQS0kxDTALBgNVBAsTBERJ U0ExJTAjBgNVBAMTHFdPTEZLSUVMLkpPU0VQSC5MLjExNzg5MjQwNDAwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEB AQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDM+TqEi7DJXmz9FlNoHo2w6BlfZsRONlZtJZBXIasbug6W7TEJktKW gZ71LjY8+e8V7e3hZxrdIsxOM7v6R31dHkBRGYJ/u/2++sP7TmdlJAXc8emgutFkwYXTX93EdlV2 XQcQmcSoPlycrKY8/mqMpJT7cGRUyXgQ5s3MhlWPq8XHJ93FDWOcZ8tb0/fw3HXqZDUgMjwP5riS pjiqL5DJlqosXA0DxzChoWm/MMIpiUmwaTgW3XqqgWZmNmJeRikPnVU1ejhnW9LiXG89dM7S2FOf /mx4CpGdPutbw1/8ChX4FIfl5XHYX8CzXw5nTtHgsi4hZ0ESFcb8AQgOhXdvAgMBAAGjggGyMIIB rjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQ1YWYoCbxWJVuLzL+BXmEsMDnTITA6BgNVHR8EMzAxMC+gLaArhilodHRw Oi8vY3JsLmRpc2EubWlsL2NybC9ET0RFTUFJTENBXzMwLmNybDAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCBsAwIwYD VR0gBBwwGjALBglghkgBZQIBCwkwCwYJYIZIAWUCAQsTMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQtAm6O4aVQIUriZsl9 BVyz9FLdhTBoBggrBgEFBQcBAQRcMFowNgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGKmh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZGlzYS5taWwv c2lnbi9ET0RFTUFJTENBXzMwLmNlcjAgBggrBgEFBQcwAYYUaHR0cDovL29jc3AuZGlzYS5taWww SQYDVR0RBEIwQIEeSk9TRVBILkwuV09MRktJRUwuQ0lWQE1BSUwuTUlMoB4GCisGAQQBgjcUAgOg EAwOMTE3ODkyNDA0MEBtaWwwGwYDVR0JBBQwEjAQBggrBgEFBQcJBDEEEwJVUzApBgNVHSUEIjAg BgorBgEEAYI3FAICBggrBgEFBQcDAgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBAHX5rn+y 0CYm8aMq3ZHpzk2gWrCQCXjFOfSSVwc//+uSMDe1PkyPOVynnR6NT3KuAhDLWlRBV4S66diG8UzB rSReu7N3BrH+BQ2UpBsq+cgbwdse6mJnm7/s1Rkw9OuyKkWlBWZeJzLspccsMaDPdgDz+DwyQLMJ e7DgzJYJjB6BaPcsSHZ0XZrJTG3+/MBIBR8P4PCaO+aWaSA7hGLq30epFxU3OYitJLaZo+jgWxkY jWufowrprFCCoxtaNnagvQ9Gy9XLGpNIyZQNUnqH+b1UOUKkPUVsklT9/8T+7j1ODqwZ3S92w7yP XICXUw9KcwRIqdzBwYmJ9QoOj/h8GEEwggVSMIIEOqADAgECAgIBuTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBb MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAK BgNVBAsTA1BLSTEWMBQGA1UEAxMNRG9EIFJvb3QgQ0EgMjAeFw0xMTA5MDgxNjAzMDhaFw0xNzA5 MDgxNjAzMDhaMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAKBgNV BAsTA0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMzAwggEiMA0GCSqG SIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDmKSLUFCbRmBpSXsWEg3N+wWCzs9CUvv0clFW/9oQsm8nA dHPvzMKZ8pnJbcoU03T/vhDy9y2/y7sGo+6YUEFlAeFXLLbL5MocrH5SNA6xjgcmPjI1r6NhCsXl CLYSeYxUwXrp8VAfXYM6ZzCzKdsdOkw5IVDYGCyNBnXuY3J4aK1inHWklAbTMmsSrwYHKb4ToMCn 8CVPt/4ft1fgGBKNIWoVuVpU+3dl2Ew/9bo8wDfhBn7Cvp4jjCjRmtfGZzjXc8m9Bx2Fb9WVCprc 2jpOKPCl6wnf5dsLzUevis27b5RA41mcUJ/JDqlxArnc6WmAOok7RQUiGAWEtRLwPMCBAgMBAAGj ggIcMIICGDAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAYYwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUSXS7DF66ev4CVO97oMaVxgmAcJYw HQYDVR0OBBYEFDVhZigJvFYlW4vMv4FeYSwwOdMhMBIGA1UdEwEB/wQIMAYBAf8CAQAwDAYDVR0k BAUwA4ABADBmBgNVHSAEXzBdMAsGCWCGSAFlAgELBTALBglghkgBZQIBCwkwCwYJYIZIAWUCAQsR MAsGCWCGSAFlAgELEjALBglghkgBZQIBCxMwDAYKYIZIAWUDAgEDGjAMBgpghkgBZQMCAQMbMDcG A1UdHwQwMC4wLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZGlzYS5taWwvY3JsL0RPRFJPT1RDQTIuY3JsMIIB AQYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgfQwgfEwOgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGLmh0dHA6Ly9jcmwuZGlzYS5taWwvaXNzdWVk dG8vRE9EUk9PVENBMl9JVC5wN2MwIAYIKwYBBQUHMAGGFGh0dHA6Ly9vY3NwLmRpc2EubWlsMIGQ BggrBgEFBQcwAoaBg2xkYXA6Ly9jcmwuZ2RzLmRpc2EubWlsL2NuJTNkRG9EJTIwUm9vdCUyMENB JTIwMiUyY291JTNkUEtJJTJjb3UlM2REb0QlMmNvJTNkVS5TLiUyMEdvdmVybm1lbnQlMmNjJTNk VVM/Y3Jvc3NDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZVBhaXI7YmluYXJ5MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAKiFYcpVcm WmLLddDdhsVS4i/zvBFkP4wvPhH8mGBA8oANKIKaaP7gSEsn0zoKe5X2AwyBFJFCOmBs4itTLezf Ea71VBfwAfmXB6ebqwvbrJeJCcbv+Qc0FgCofhFTnnwvoTiimXk5NEFufbhYMFaInuSqZEXZoERi OrflMdORgPEbELJncNVbq1m0WkgWQsQCTNpsaMpQHTG+N5nHz1PMQilWw50XygPnEFrxOTwczPsb lwom8zHf4KtcJJ2e3jh9AlFnRvmTcIXtClXC9MFoWp8IyR17m3bcVO85jBjlDETu9wayH/XL5g69 1KH/1PmRByJSebfA/eyy+IX0RPtcMYIDMjCCAy4CAQEwZDBdMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UE ChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQLEwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEYMBYGA1UEAxMP RE9EIEVNQUlMIENBLTMwAgNJyuMwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAaMwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3 DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTYwMTI5MjEyNzUzWjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUFHCQ2ifZ nhjjK200C7NDcMAhJkAwWAYJKoZIhvcNAQkPMUswSTAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzAOBggqhkiG9w0DAgIC AIAwBwYFKw4DAgcwDQYIKoZIhvcNAwICASgwBwYFKw4DAhowCgYIKoZIhvcNAgUwcwYJKwYBBAGC NxAEMWYwZDBdMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEYMBYGA1UEChMPVS5TLiBHb3Zlcm5tZW50MQwwCgYDVQQL EwNEb0QxDDAKBgNVBAsTA1BLSTEYMBYGA1UEAxMPRE9EIEVNQUlMIENBLTMwAgNJyuYwdQYLKoZI hvcNAQkQAgsxZqBkMF0xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRgwFgYDVQQKEw9VLlMuIEdvdmVybm1lbnQxDDAK BgNVBAsTA0RvRDEMMAoGA1UECxMDUEtJMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9ET0QgRU1BSUwgQ0EtMzACA0nK5jAN BgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASCAQDEg3TGakhqjQKJiYlheehOdNNFDebWqV/4ctgHxo+CgBE5b2S4Z2hX TMvlb6PyuGuT+P2A6hYiMQuD0zqrbgVxBdUUOnavgEIcH0dtpbuvwEpYHQ9lkgCLwwm5VmL8QrrB wXB7Q375Kxt9S/6QbzGfK/v/C1lTjeID0Nq2n1PjTeX5wFcvrRMpZ0sz3VV2wqw1Ycj8yfc6yrEe 4A6GWpLOJMMlRa1EcMCervcB1Fba3iAEcAVL8XTD2fg8OfLoiQ18UZxFv1tUREaL08OJoQFP3GQf u83/wPvEavZoqA+VQ2hMRiv0yXPT1es/ta6Ak6rVLv2a+TsBGQZ+F4K2SQFcAAAAAAAA ------=_NextPart_000_03A6_01D15AB2.00874A80-- From nobody Fri Jan 29 14:55:29 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3011A1A9084 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nW1V3uNnEYou for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qg0-x231.google.com (mail-qg0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 064591A9081 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qg0-x231.google.com with SMTP id o11so77616066qge.2 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=threatguard-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:subject:to:references:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ot5do4mrMB2f7mOig9qUDfFpLVsfPYikbwqYb0vs0uA=; b=nLKg7VifX+nxpxPDGGSGt+8BVvmw9PYNxcFrm+iHoxaGjrVpGNd1cAou3BKcYBrQrP 1JkvbzyIhwqGJ9dk+scmJ7UYMBvM+pCi7kL+iNZKpsO9Q2dJ1RDMSsdQP3b5AWn4vdRj jyo6UMiYHdxgN6Xxe3Y7IBRawtgLJiBHQfn8PNrY3qD3AnigKNco2ynOtcSI0cKKghSE ZiwUF5uAYPKO7cj55pBVu4PhPvrZUHxfbDtFnyHzJ3663GH4Hf+3S9QpcgSAoNJhh7Db ZX8arjEC779/V6i69JZLtu1Tz5ReypDgMnvGWT4U2Yiwh6x48hWyRmB+XxkqmP7nPMj8 yxRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:references:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ot5do4mrMB2f7mOig9qUDfFpLVsfPYikbwqYb0vs0uA=; b=dQANNJEUL+SWVgLVuee7ZAivcYU7UjL9N4QKHAMWORK6bcmC5RCBZhl5nIEx55vQFm GOGChm3yfQnuh+Vf1AjUHw9gOxVS2qEXdch+dKNCEqk+1rTePNQOMTcH3iYglG8Vb8R+ zujGS7+/WegW57uwnp8qaIQlg1Tk0mpgcemjte/ZHejmgxCGp+waoNtMIcK6t00BQdnT YRt6hru9p53rvQ7E6jR9png4giwbOWTwTJ77B7LoBR4m7ucjAFbZ5kZYLR3jjbw91WYr FzqszU8abO87yN/1552M6W1Pb+bSOS5RxMrhqMKxSUGTW2fytRn1pElv8vZcCyp13cIU HC/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTWoDxkL6IX7VPK6OspNlS+vCIamdNoMRPmTJ0CquD342egNKKexS88SZTJs5sbIQ== X-Received: by 10.140.19.231 with SMTP id 94mr14175336qgh.32.1454108125140; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.16.1.249] (h69-130-165-88.cntcnh.dsl.dynamic.tds.net. [69.130.165.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c190sm6930824qkb.27.2016.01.29.14.55.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:55:24 -0800 (PST) From: Gunnar Engelbach X-Google-Original-From: Gunnar Engelbach To: Jim Schaad , sacm@ietf.org References: <063001d15a1c$f74a97a0$e5dfc6e0$@augustcellars.com> Message-ID: <56ABEDE4.80200@ThreatGuard.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:55:32 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <063001d15a1c$f74a97a0$e5dfc6e0$@augustcellars.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [sacm] Matching Algorithm Requirements X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 22:55:28 -0000 Good questions. But before getting too deep in them, let's consider the cases under which such an algorithm will be necessary: A) Correlation needs to be performed consistently between products from separate vendors -- and/or -- B) Correlation is a federated function If we make the assumption that information about an endpoint will be communicated including attributes for identification (as opposed to resolving to an identifier), then you have to get pretty creative to come up with a case where either is the case. Even if we choose to go with the identifier route, that identifier is most likely to be for a specific data store (so the identifier would actually be store + ID). As long as that identifier is created by that data store, then the same algorithm will have been used and consistency is maintained. A consequence of this is that the quality of correlation will vary from product to product, which in turn becomes a marketing point for various solutions. As long as this is an acceptable state, then I don't think having a correlation algorithm is important to what SACM is trying to accomplish right now. I would, however, like to hear if anybody else can think of a use case that makes this of more immediate importance. 'Cuz it's Friday and I've already started on weekend mode. --gun On 1/28/2016 5:41 PM, Jim Schaad wrote: > There has been a discussion on matching algorithms with respect to the > requirements draft. I would like to get feedback for myself on what the > requirements of this matching algorithm is supposed to be doing. To that > end I would like to start with some questions. > > 1. What are the targets that a matching algorithm are supposed to match? > One target is going to be endpoints (for some definition of endpoints). > However are there other targets that need to be matched as well? Do we > match Software packages? SACM components? > > 2. What are the outputs of the matching algorithm? Is it a binary YES/NO? > Is it some type of confidence level? 90% confidence match? Are there > historical notations? Yesterday I would have said that they matched, but > today I say they do not match. > > 3. The Friday morning cabal was talking about matching algorithms at one > point, I did not always read the minutes from that group, however did they > ever come up with the basics/starting point for this algorithm so we can > start discussing what it does or does not do and what it is based on from > the IM? > > 4. Is the matching algorithm restricted to just the inputs given to it, or > is it allowed to perform additional queries of SACM entities to get more > data. If it gets more data, is it restricted to the ACLS of the questor? > If it is not restricted are there security problems? If it is restricted > and there reproducibility problems? > > 5. Are there currently any matching algorithms from the prospective > solution space that the SACM group needs to be looking at? > > Jim > > > > _______________________________________________ > sacm mailing list > sacm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm From nobody Sun Jan 31 22:37:56 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: sacm@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1C81AD09F; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:37:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pzydaom02QD4; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBD811AD09D; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:37:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mb-2.local ([IPv6:2601:647:4204:51:a8fc:d6dc:8732:faaf]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id u116bkNt021557 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 1 Feb 2016 06:37:49 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) To: "opsec@ietf.org" References: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA6BE9F6C7@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <9DDB58C939D0974CAEB9F2A0A0FC15C109DD9470@G2W2529.americas.hpqcorp.net> From: joel jaeggli Message-ID: <56AEFD3A.1030109@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 22:37:46 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/44.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TmGeIj5Q5fXM7cpbAPK8WFObWsUg1dwrl" Archived-At: Cc: "sacm@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [sacm] [OPSEC] Feedback on the SACM Vulnerability Assessment Scenario X-BeenThere: sacm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: SACM WG mail list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 06:37:53 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --TmGeIj5Q5fXM7cpbAPK8WFObWsUg1dwrl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Trimmed opsawg since this seems most appropiate to opsec / sacm https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-coffin-sacm-vuln-scenario/ got a signficant change associated with the sacm usecase alignment. that seems like a signficant effort borne out of this feedback. joel On 12/2/15 9:21 AM, Haynes, Dan wrote: > Hi Josh, >=20 > Thanks for the feedback!=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > Comments inline below. Please let me know if I am misunderstanding > anything. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > =20 >=20 > Danny >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > *From:* sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Stevens, Jos= h > (Cyber Security) > *Sent:* Thursday, November 19, 2015 10:37 PM > *To:* Romascanu, Dan (Dan) ; opsec@ietf.org; > opsawg@ietf.org > *Cc:* sacm@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [sacm] Feedback on the SACM Vulnerability Assessment Sce= nario >=20 > =20 >=20 > Hi Dan, >=20 > =20 >=20 > Agreed, this does help focus the work for this SACM Working Group. > After reading the draft-coffin-sacm-vuln-scenario, I had some initial > feedback from an enterprise defense perspective that might be > incorporated. Here are my contributions: >=20 > =20 >=20 > 1. In the abstract, a vulnerability report is referenced, however= > it=92s not clear whether an authenticated or unauthenticated vulnerabil= ity > scan report (or both) is being referred to. If it can consume both, I > would call that out. If what=92s being referred to is actually a recurr= ing > industry standard vulnerability report from a vendor, that could also > clear up the abstract prior to the scope statement where the > vulnerability report is defined. >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: the intent is a vulnerability report is that it is published b= y > a vendor (e.g. security advisory) in some un-prescribed format from > which the relevant data can be extracted from it in some un-prescribed > way. That is, the vulnerability report is not necessarily an industry > standard (at least not in the context of this document). We can try to= > clarify this a bit. >=20 > =20 >=20 > 2. In the abstract, there isn=92t a reference to the endpoint bas= ed > approach that is detailed in the next section. Ideally, instead of =93I= t > begins with an enterprise ingesting a vulnerability report and ends at > the point of identifying affected endpoints=94, this could be better > summarized as =93Endpoint data is pushed to a central point for compari= son > with vulnerability criteria to enable posture assessment.=94 =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: we can try to clarify this. =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > 3. 3.3 A few comments on page 7, paragraph 4 =93The attributes > could be manually entered into a CMDB by a human, This would include an= y > attributes that cannot be collected programmatically.=94 I believe the > intent here is to leave fields open for the user to define and leverage= > as needed, however I'm not sure we want to advocate manual entry? > Ideally, if we can use a common set of algorithms that can be *manually= * > adjusted to provide exception based rules to the overall effort. If we= > give a user the chance to mangle data sets, they probably will - I'm in= > favor of providing additional fields that can be interfaced with other > security API's where automation is the default workflow choice. Here > are some alternatives to manual entry for these three categories: >=20 > a. Location - for a global organization consider the DNS sub > domain infrastructure, for a smaller organization consider SIEM events > that stamp the closest proximity security infrastructure into an event > (zone based), others might be ARP cache, DNS cache, etc. >=20 > b. Role - compare with external maps to identify external facing > endpoints, fingerprint web server packages with a local agent, scrape > local process table to gauge TCP connections to the web server (is it > really a web server), etc. >=20 > c. Criticality - analytics on logins, active sessions, user > account counts and net flow will provide a strong enterprise criticalit= y > score >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: I don=92t think allowing users to manually enter attributes in= to > the CMDB necessarily means mangled data sets. For example, an > organization could define a schema that defines what the information > should look like. While it wouldn=92t likely be standardized, I think > that is ok given this type of information would most likely be > organization-specific anyways. What do others think? >=20 > =20 >=20 > With that said, I think this other information and the algorithms to > process this information would be useful as well. Does anyone have any= > thoughts on this approach? >=20 > =20 >=20 > 4. 5.1 If the authenticated or unauthenticated data sets do get > merged or compared, a decision tree will have to be pre-established - > does the authenticated/agent based score override a more recent but > unauthenticated scan finding? >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: I don=92t think I know the answer at this time. It depends o= n > how the WG ends up defining the assessment logic. Maybe it is somethin= g > that can be configured in the evaluation guidance or maybe authenticate= d > data always takes precedence over unauthenticated data. With that said= , > authenticated/unauthenticated sounds like it would be a good piece of > information to capture about an attribute in the information model (e.g= =2E > similar how we want to capture if an attribute can be used for > designation/identification or if it is has privacy concerns). Do other= s > have thoughts on authenticated vs. unauthenticated attributes impacting= > assessments? >=20 > =20 >=20 > 5. For Appendix B: Priority should include cyber intelligence and= > campaign based vulnerability scores. For example, in 2013 - CVE's > leveraged by the "Red October Advanced Cyber Espionage Campaign > targeting Diplomatic officials" should be prioritized well above the > CVE's used in Conficker , etc. How can this standard be directed or > modified to accept industry standard Indicator of Compromise (IOC)=92s = and > provide intel driven posture assessments? >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: agree, it probably makes sense to say something about cyber > intelligence information in determining scores and priorities. What do= > others think?=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > When you say =93standard=94 are you referring to the vulnerability > assessment scenario draft? SACM in general? Or, something > else? =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > 6. Other general comments: >=20 > =20 >=20 > o Are mutex string acquisition, DLL fingerprinting, IOC processing an= d > auto remediation out of the scope for the current Working Group? In > addition, to Vulnerability assessment, these would all go nicely > together as part of a standard endpoint spec for vendors to communicate= > through. I=92ve seen email traffic from the group on several of these > related topics. >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: Remediation is currently out-of-scope for SACM. Regarding > mutex string acquisition, DLL fingerprinting, and IOC processing, I > think it depends on what is required to collect the data. If we can > collect the data by looking at something on the endpoint (e.g. file > hashes, registry keys, etc.), I suspect it would be in scope. If we > have to do more detailed analysis (e.g. dynamic malware analysis) that > require specialized tools and sandboxes, I suspect that would be > out-of-scope. With that said, the output of this more detailed analysi= s > could produce information that would serve as input into creating > guidance to assess endpoints for IOCs at which point I think it would > fall within the scope of SACM.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > o Section 3. The multiple references to CMDB make some potential > assumptions about managed vs. unmanaged endpoints >=20 > =A7 It=92s possible that unmanaged endpoints won't be found in a CMDB,= does > this model account in any way for those? >=20 > =A7 An alternative is to consider continuous netflow analytics updatin= g a > repository / data lake >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: We didn=92t really think of CMDB at that level. We simply use= d > CMDB to mean a place to store guidance, data, results, etc. Basically,= > anything that is input or output with respect to an assessment. With > that said, as SACM begins to define what it needs in a repository (and > its data stores), these are definitely questions that need to be asked.= >=20 > =20 >=20 > o Is Rogue Device Detection under consideration as a data point or > even an Endpoint Type? >=20 > o Discovering neighboring endpoints >=20 > o ARP as sensor data=20 >=20 > o Once a rogue device has been detected, a detailed (or secondary) > vulnerability assessment should begin automatically. >=20 > =20 >=20 > [danny]: in previous discussions, there was mention of managed vs. > unmanaged endpoints, on the network, in the context of BYOD. Managed > endpoints are those owned/controlled by the organization whereas > unmanaged would be endpoints that are not owned nor controlled by the > organization (i.e. personal laptop, etc.). Would your definition of a > rogue endpoint align with an unmanaged endpoint? =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > Hope this helps. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Josh Stevens >=20 > Hewlett Packard Enterprise >=20 > =20 >=20 > *From:* sacm [mailto:sacm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Romascanu, > Dan (Dan) > *Sent:* Thursday, November 19, 2015 7:51 AM > *To:* opsec@ietf.org ; opsawg@ietf.org > > *Cc:* sacm@ietf.org > *Subject:* [sacm] Feedback on the SACM Vulnerability Assessment Scenari= o >=20 > =20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > =20 >=20 > I am reiterating a request that I made at IETF 94 in the OPSAWG meeting= , > and also sent to the mail lists of opsec and opsawg. The SACM WG is > considering a document > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-coffin-sacm-vuln-scenario/ that > describes the operational practice of vulnerability reports, which we > believe is an important use case in the security assessment life cycle.= > We are requiring feedback from operators about the scenario describe in= > this document =96 does it make sense? Is it similar with what you do in= > operational real life? Are you using similar or different methods for > vulnerability assessment in your networks? A quick reading and short > feedback would be greatly appreciated. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Thanks and Regards, >=20 > =20 >=20 > Dan >=20 > =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > OPSEC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec >=20 --TmGeIj5Q5fXM7cpbAPK8WFObWsUg1dwrl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2 Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iEYEARECAAYFAlau/TsACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrK9wgCeNPRUusGtpVmqSZqTYXOy8meE yVYAni46sXUxThSae1IGISVKdVrSLMeX =Ntuw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --TmGeIj5Q5fXM7cpbAPK8WFObWsUg1dwrl--