Hello, folks, A few months ago there had been a thread on this list about the publication of the UK CPNI document "Security Assessment of the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)" (available at: http://www.cpni.gov.uk/Docs/tn-03-09-security-assessment-TCP.pdf). After the publication of that document, I produced an IETF I-D version of it, which is available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcp-security-00 Two possible venues for this document are tcpm and opsec. And we're currently trying to figure out the best path forward. One of the tcpm co-chairs (Wesley Eddy) has started a thread on this issue (see bellow). My personal take is that the IETF is responsible for the maintenance of its protocols, and this effort carried ut by the UK CPNI should be welcome, and the IETF should take the chance and benefit from this work to publish advice on TCP security/resiliency. Thanks! Kind regards, Fernando Gont -------- Original Message -------- Subject: draft-gont-tcp-security Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:19:43 -0500 From: Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[Verizon] <wesley.m.eddy@xxxxxxxx> To: tcpm@xxxxxxxx <tcpm@xxxxxxxx> CC: Fernando Gont <fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Joe Abley <jabley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@xxxxxxxxx>, "rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx" <rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx> Fernando has a draft intended for BCP, that has been discussed somewhat on the OPSEC and IETF mailing lists: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-tcp-security-00 Since it concerns TCP and facets of both TCP implementation and stack configuration, TCPM holds the most technical ability to evaluate or work on this, in my opinion. As I understand, Fernando is interested in having this document done as a WG item, but hasn't gotten clear signals as to whether OPSEC or TCPM would be more appropriate, or on the relative level of support in the WGs to read/review/revise the material. It is a big document, but if TCPM'ers could take a look at it and let us know if they would support this in TCPM as a WG item, that would be very helpful. Or if you have other thoughts about how to handle it, of course share those too :). We don't really need a detailed review at this point ... just a discussion of whether there would be support for this work to happen in TCPM, if it's worthwhile, if it should be done somewhere else, etc. --------------------------- Wes Eddy Network & Systems Architect Verizon FNS / NASA GRC Office: (216) 433-6682 --------------------------- -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxx PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf