Alissa,
It’s been about 2 months and the REGEXT chairs would like to know the
status of this document. Have you checked Gustavo’s message and
confirmed that your concerns have been addressed?
Thanks,
Jim and Antoin
On 26 Jun 2020, at 11:42, Barry Leiba wrote:
Alissa, will you please check the current version of the data-escrow
document <
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow/
and see if Gustavo's changes address your concern? And if not,
please work with Gustavo to get it sorted out. Thanks.
Barry
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:08 PM Gustavo Lozano
<gustavo.loz...@icann.org> wrote:
Thank you Alissa,
Comments inline prefixed with GL-
Regards,
Gustavo
On 4/9/20, 06:48, "regext on behalf of Alissa Cooper via
Datatracker" <regext-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of nore...@ietf.org>
wrote:
Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-07: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to
all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to
cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)
Please refer to
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_iesg_statement_discuss-2Dcriteria.html&d=DwICAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VbweciUcwYQpIOZDSxl0ezGd1hGDtd-0BvgAgfmwfE0&m=6KotPsZrrzq2bpn2K-y1yF2urMkEJOz0OITxaBun2Xs&s=hcpPqoVjnm9-aoinq9ndolZqJuxMFPlrXAwKp9NNEi4&e=
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found
here:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dregext-2Ddata-2Descrow_&d=DwICAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VbweciUcwYQpIOZDSxl0ezGd1hGDtd-0BvgAgfmwfE0&m=6KotPsZrrzq2bpn2K-y1yF2urMkEJOz0OITxaBun2Xs&s=tOGRD4dNp47NFz1LacDypLNFM0wMf5om9bc9_HKbQMg&e=
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I support Benjamin's DISCUSS and Roman's last DISCUSS point.
GL - The latest version of the draft covers the feedback from Roman
(DISCUSS cleared), and I also believe Benjamin's feedback (waiting
for his response)
Regarding Section
11, there are often legal agreements in place that govern all
sorts of things
about how protocols transfer data between parties, but those are
not the main
thing to document in an RFC. Section 11 should be documenting the
technical
considerations for how to protect the data that may be escrowed.
GL - draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow describes a standardized format
for escrow, and it's not a document specifying escrow services (i.e.,
no definition of a transport protocol, signaling mechanism, etc.).
Section 11 has been strengthen based on the comments from other
IESG's members, and I believe it's in good shape now.
Here are the differences between 07 and 08, and 08 and 09:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-08.txt
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-regext-data-escrow-09.txt
I think that a draft describing the best security / operational
practices for escrow service providers could be a good idea. In the
case of the gTLD space, there is no urgency for such a document, as
the security / operational requirements are detailed in legal
agreements.
Hopefully, this clarifies my previous comments.
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_regext&d=DwICAg&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=VbweciUcwYQpIOZDSxl0ezGd1hGDtd-0BvgAgfmwfE0&m=6KotPsZrrzq2bpn2K-y1yF2urMkEJOz0OITxaBun2Xs&s=gtb7G2HcGVH0Nkn1jQNw3zcDejr56jw5emEs2RK8ilw&e=
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
