Reviewer: Samita Chakrabarti
Review result: Ready with Nits
The draft has been posted in the IoT-Directorate list for iot-WG chairs'
comments though it is apparent that there no direct impact to low power IoT
devices that are typically discussed at IETF. However, the reviewer recommends
an analysis of threat study if the opportunistic encryption is applied to
battery powered wireless devices.
As for the document under review, the iot-directorates agreed that it has no
impact on the IETF iot devices. However, multiple folks expressed concerns
about IEEE document access difficulty for the follow-up work. Nits: The author
of the document may consider adding a note to the document for future ease of
access of the IEEE documents related to the concerns described below.
I have added a few excerpts from those discussions:
===========From Michael Richardson & Toreless
Eckert:================================ Toerless Eckert <tte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> https://www.ietf.org/lib/dt/documents/LIAISON/file41.pdf describes a
supposedly existing > process to address Michaels concerns re. the
accessibility of IEEE document. I am not > aware that this process has ever
been exercised, so i doubt it > works. It definitely would
That's only useful for our (IETF) reviewers, at the time we are processing an
I-D. RFC8995 references IEEE 802.1AR (no date), the 2018 edition is current.
RFC7030 references IEEE 802.1AR-2009, but you can't get that document anymore.
So you can't even see the 2009 document to compare against the 2018 document.
> Aka: any maintenance that IEEE may do on RFC8110 will be as good or as
badly accessible > IETF members as any other IEEE work. If anything, it
would be useful to think about > additional text for the draft to improve
that situation.
my opinion: if you want to make sure no implementers can read your document
in ten years, then the IEEE is definitely a good way to go.
ITU-T is more efficient: you don't have to wait ten years.
None of this is really an *IoT* issue.
============Comments from Stephen Farrell======================
On 12/08/2024 18:21, Chakrabarti, Samita wrote:
> I plan to capture the IoT-Directorate review comments in the IoT-DIR
> document review comments.
In that case, please also reflect the opinion that there's
nothing interesting to see here - letting IEEE take over
future work on opportunistic security for WiFi makes sense
and we shouldn't get wrapped around imaginary axles and
make that needlessly difficult.
I was the AD who AD-sponsored 8110 - it was done in the IETF at
the time because it was timely and the correct evolution of things
using opportunistic security is to make a path forwards from that
to authenticated mechanisms. Doing that in IEEE is a better place
as they define the authenticated preferred landing zone if one
started from an opportunistic scenario.
That said, I'm sure IETF participants will continue to manage to
find process issues and difficulties where those continue to not
exist;-)
=============================================================
--
last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
