[Dots] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dots-requirements-16

Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> Sat, 24 November 2018 20:32 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.com>
X-Original-To: dots@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dots@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33E6130F66; Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:32:55 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-dots-requirements.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, dots@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.89.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154309157569.4300.10419245253211850237@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 12:32:55 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dots/pyBLL9kooWphXkc_yCDvRmqY2YY>
Subject: [Dots] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dots-requirements-16
X-BeenThere: dots@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "List for discussion of DDoS Open Threat Signaling \(DOTS\) technology and directions." <dots.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dots/>
List-Post: <mailto:dots@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots>, <mailto:dots-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 20:32:56 -0000

Reviewer: Scott Bradner
Review result: Has Nits

This is an OPS-DIR review of Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Open Threat
Signaling Requirements (draft-ietf-dots-requirements)

This document lists requirements for a protocol to used between providers of
DDOS mitigation services and users of such services, as such there can be no
direct operational issues with the document.  I also did not find any indirect
operational issues.

I think the document would benefit from the addition of a section before the
requirements section that specifically describes the setup assumed by the
document. The descriptions before there hint at a presumed setup but a new
section that clearly states the setup would be helpful. (the setup appears to
be one where all network traffic to and from a protected entity flows through a
DDoS mitigation service provider.  The provider includes one or more DOTS
servers.  The protected entity includes one or more DOTS clients that
communicate with the DOTS servers)

Requirement SIG-005 addresses channel redirection – maybe there needs to be a
way that clients can move to a new server on their own if they lose hearbeat
from the server they were using – that might include a way for a server to
provide a list of alternative servers to the clients