Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea-03

From: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:11:12 -0400

I have reviewed draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6-09 as part of the
security directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents
being processed by the IESG.  These comments were written primarily
for the benefit of the security area directors.  Document editors and
WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call
comments.

Draft is an opinion piece by a private member of the community who
happens to wear several other hats.  No protocol content.

Other than a pro forma note that the draft contains no security
considerations section, I have no security considerations per se with
this document.

The one observation I will make is that, having now been a participant
in two serious cross-area efforts (probably more than that, but the
two I'm thinking of are DNSSEC and SIDR), I have noticed that there
does not appear to be any way of hurrying up the process of growing
experts in a complex new topic.  That is: when we started DNSSEC, we
had security people and we had DNS people, the two groups were almost
completely talking past each other, and the ops people were only sort
of in the room.  It took years to get to the point where we had people
who really understood both topics, and longer to get ops to care.
Jury is still out on SIDR, but it sure feels like the same curve.  If
there's any way to speed the process, I don't know what it is;
attempts to force the pace seem more likely to result in messes that
require yet another return to the drawing board.

---

From: Rob Austein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 13:22:29 -0400

At Wed, 29 May 2013 13:11:12 -0400, Rob Austein wrote:
> 
> I have reviewed draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6-09

Message-ID <[email-masked]> was about
draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea, not draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6.

Cut and paste error in secdir review boilerplate.  Sigh.  Sorry for
any confusion.