[bess] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-07: (with COMMENT)

[Mirja Kühlewind <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-df-election-framework-07: 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-bess-evpn-df-election-framework/



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

First one minor editorial comment:
Sec 3.2 "Otherwise if even a single advertisement for the type-4 route is
       not received with the locally configured DF Alg and capability,
       the Default DF Election algorithm (modulus) algorithm MUST be
       used as in [RFC7432]."
I believe you meant a single advertisement is received without the configured
DF Alg and capability (or a different one I guess), and not that the
advertisement is not received at all (because that might be hard to check),
right? Maybe you can rephrase this sentence a bit to make the intention more
clear!

However, think about this further, I wondering if there is something here that
such be discussed in the security considerations, e.g. how easy would it be for
an attacker to disturb the algo selection and cause a fallback to the default
scheme...?