Recommendations for Transport-Protocol Port Randomization
RFC 6056

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
09 (System) Notify list changed from tsvwg-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization@ietf.org to (None)
2012-08-22
09 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Robert Sparks
2012-08-22
09 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the Yes position for Jari Arkko
2012-08-22
09 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Tim Polk
2012-08-22
09 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for David Harrington
2011-01-19
09 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue.
RFC 6056
BCP 156
2011-01-18
09 (System) RFC published
2010-08-20
09 Amy Vezza State changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2010-08-20
09 (System) IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress
2010-08-20
09 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2010-08-20
09 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2010-08-20
09 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2010-08-20
09 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2010-08-19
09 Lars Eggert State changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation - Defer::AD Followup by Lars Eggert
2010-08-19
09 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] Position for Tim Polk has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Tim Polk
2010-08-15
09 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] Position for Robert Sparks has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Robert Sparks
2010-08-15
09 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2010-08-15
09 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-09.txt
2010-06-21
09 Lars Eggert State Changes to IESG Evaluation - Defer::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation - Defer::AD Followup by Lars Eggert
2010-06-07
09 David Harrington [Ballot Position Update] Position for David Harrington has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by David Harrington
2010-05-31
09 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] Position for Jari Arkko has been changed to Yes from Discuss by Jari Arkko
2010-05-31
08 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-08.txt
2010-04-13
09 Tim Polk [Ballot comment]
2010-04-13
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot discuss]
This is a revised discuss, eliminating issues previously addressed and restating/clarifying those that have not been addressed

(1) Section 3.2 states ...
2010-04-13
09 Sean Turner [Ballot comment]
The authors should also consult Pasi's COMMENT position to address SECDIR review provided by Charlie Kaufman.
2010-04-13
09 Sean Turner [Ballot discuss]
2010-04-13
09 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] Position for Sean Turner has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Sean Turner
2010-04-12
09 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2010-04-12
07 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-07.txt
2010-04-09
09 David Harrington
[Ballot discuss]
Section 4.

If this document is supposed to make recommendations on NAT behavior I think it
needs to discuss when it makes sense ...
2010-04-09
09 David Harrington [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by David Harrington
2010-04-08
09 Sean Turner
[Ballot discuss]
I am picking up Pasi's DISCUSS on this document. The authors should also consult Pasi's COMMENT positions to address the SECDIR ...
2010-04-08
09 Sean Turner [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Sean Turner
2010-03-11
09 Cindy Morgan State Changes to IESG Evaluation - Defer::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation - Defer by Cindy Morgan
2010-03-11
09 Robert Sparks
[Ballot comment]
The text should acknowledge that applications using RTP are really at the mercy of what their underlying UDP implementation (for the current majority ...
2010-03-11
09 Robert Sparks
[Ballot discuss]
Before suggesting that NATs follow the recommendations in this
document, there should be more discussion of the impact of the
recommendations on deployed ...
2010-03-11
09 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
It is interesting that Algorithms 1, 3, and 4 statistically favor port
numbers one greater than allocated port numbers. But probably not worth ...
2010-03-05
09 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2010-03-04
2010-03-04
09 Cullen Jennings State Changes to IESG Evaluation - Defer from IESG Evaluation by Cullen Jennings
2010-03-04
09 Cullen Jennings
[Ballot comment]
For the IESG more than the authors .... My current understanding of BCP would imply this should be a PS that update TCP, UPD ...
2010-03-04
09 Cullen Jennings
[Ballot discuss]
One other issues that got raised was would it be possible to give advice about getting initial randomness. Perhaps pointers to other RFC ...
2010-03-04
09 Ross Callon [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ross Callon
2010-03-04
09 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
The document says:

  As mentioned in Section 2.1, the dynamic ports consist of the range
  49152-65535.  However, ephemeral port ...
2010-03-04
09 Jari Arkko
[Ballot discuss]
This is a good and much needed document, thanks for writing it. I
did have one issue, however. Perhaps I'm missing something ...
2010-03-04
09 Russ Housley
[Ballot comment]
Since we are trying to replace the TCP MD5 signature option [RFC2385]
  with TCP AO, it seems like a bad idea to ...
2010-03-04
09 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley
2010-03-04
09 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Jari Arkko
2010-03-04
09 Jari Arkko
[Ballot comment]
The document says:

  As mentioned in Section 2.1, the dynamic ports consist of the range
  49152-65535.  However, ephemeral port ...
2010-03-04
09 Dan Romascanu [Ballot comment]
I support the issues raised by Pasi, Robert and Tim in their DISCUSSes
2010-03-04
09 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu
2010-03-03
09 Cullen Jennings
[Ballot comment]
For the IESG more than the authors .... My current understanding of BCP would imply this should be a PS that update TCP, UPD ...
2010-03-03
09 Cullen Jennings
[Ballot discuss]
This is a very long discuss and many of the appoints in are purely asking we certain attacks considered. It's perfectly reasonable ...
2010-03-03
09 Magnus Westerlund
[Ballot discuss]
Section 4.

If this document is supposed to make recommendations on NAT behavior I think it needs to discuss when it makes sense ...
2010-03-03
09 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings
2010-03-03
09 Magnus Westerlund [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund
2010-03-03
09 Robert Sparks
[Ballot comment]
The text should acknowledge that applications using RTP are really at the mercy of what their underlying UDP implementation (for the current majority ...
2010-03-03
09 Robert Sparks
[Ballot discuss]
Before suggesting that NATs follow the recommendations in this
document, there should be more discussion of the impact of the
recommendations on deployed ...
2010-03-03
09 Robert Sparks [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Robert Sparks
2010-03-03
09 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Charlie Kaufman.
2010-03-03
09 Ralph Droms [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ralph Droms
2010-03-03
09 Ralph Droms
[Ballot comment]
I think there needs to be some text between this text in section 2.1:

  The dynamic port range defined by IANA ...
2010-03-03
09 Adrian Farrel
[Ballot comment]
It is interesting that Algorithms 1, 3, and 4 statistically favor port
numbers one greater than allocated port numbers. But probably not worth ...
2010-03-03
09 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Adrian Farrel
2010-03-02
09 Ron Bonica [Ballot comment]
I support Tim's discuss regarding port range selection.
2010-03-02
09 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ron Bonica
2010-03-02
09 Lars Eggert State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Lars Eggert
2010-03-02
09 Pasi Eronen
[Ballot comment]
Charlie Kaufman's SecDir review identified a number of minor
clarifications/editorial nits that should be addressed; it seems
the authors are already ...
2010-03-02
09 Pasi Eronen
[Ballot discuss]
I have reviewed draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-06, and have
couple of small concern that I'd like to discuss before recommending
approval of the document:

- Section ...
2010-03-02
09 Pasi Eronen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Pasi Eronen
2010-03-02
09 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot comment]
section 3.1, final paragraph
s/DCCP is not affected is not affected/DCCP is not affected/

Section 3.2 states:
  As ...
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot discuss]
There are a couple of issues I would like to discuss before moving to No Object for this
document...

(1) Section 3.2 ...
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot comment]
section 3.1, final paragraph
s/DCCP is not affected is not affected/DCCP is not affected/

Section 3.2 states:
  As ...
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot discuss]
There are a couple of issues I would like to discuss before moving to No Object for this
document...

(1) Section 3.2 ...
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Tim Polk
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot comment]
section 3.1, final paragraph
s/DCCP is not affected is not affected/DCCP is not affected/

Section 3.2 states:
  As ...
2010-03-01
09 Tim Polk
[Ballot comment]
section 3.1, final paragraph
s/DCCP is not affected is not affected/DCCP is not affected/

Section 3.2 states:
  As ...
2010-02-27
09 Alexey Melnikov [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Alexey Melnikov
2010-02-23
09 Amanda Baber IANA comments:

As described in the IANA Considerations section, we understand this
document to have NO IANA Actions.
2010-02-20
09 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Charlie Kaufman
2010-02-20
09 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Charlie Kaufman
2010-02-16
09 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2010-02-16
09 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert Placed on agenda for telechat - 2010-03-04 by Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert [Note]: 'James Polk (jmpolk@cisco.com) is the Document Shepherd.' added by Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert Ballot has been issued by Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert Created "Approve" ballot
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert Last Call was requested by Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2010-02-15
09 (System) Last call text was added
2010-02-15
09 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2010-02-15
09 Lars Eggert State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::AD Followup by Lars Eggert
2010-02-15
09 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2010-02-15
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-06.txt
2009-12-04
09 Lars Eggert State Changes to AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from AD Evaluation by Lars Eggert
2009-12-04
09 Lars Eggert State Changes to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested by Lars Eggert
2009-12-04
09 Cindy Morgan [Note]: 'James Polk (jmpolk@cisco.com) is the Document Shepherd.' added by Cindy Morgan
2009-12-04
09 Cindy Morgan
  (1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the
          Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of ...
2009-12-04
09 Cindy Morgan Earlier history may be found in the Comment Log for draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization.
2009-12-01
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-05.txt
2009-07-02
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-04.txt
2009-03-12
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-03.txt
2008-08-31
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-02.txt
2008-02-25
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-01.txt
2007-12-14
09 (System) Earlier history may be found in the Comment Log for draft-larsen-tsvwg-port-randomization.
2007-12-14
09 (System) Draft Added by the IESG Secretary in state 0.  by system
2007-12-06
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-tsvwg-port-randomization-00.txt