Subject: [sipcore] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-sipcore-status-unwanted-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 19:59:59 -0700

Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sipcore-status-unwanted-05: No Objection

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://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sipcore-status-unwanted/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with EKR's comment and would like to see additional security
considerations that spell out the dangers of not sending this over secure
network or without mutual authentication (MiTM attack he describes).  

I was glad to see the explanation for this draft in the shepherd report
and ballot text, but think the explanation should be in the draft as
well.  I was curious about implementations as there is the potential for
trouble with this option.  It seems like it should be experimental first,
but I guess we could always make it historic later if unforeseen problems
arise.