Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05

Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> Tue, 01 September 2015 03:11 UTC

Return-Path: <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCCD1B790A; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xje5gzCskwdp; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-x231.google.com (mail-ob0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB7C51B7909; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obkg7 with SMTP id g7so107436466obk.3; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yxGtm3D5ZkiLtZhRNAl6d+Ygs9lGZPnwzmsDN264C5o=; b=yxtLcSItDNLQuTaeGcl0NCoQfUA1G0MSBss1w8I1cRMqTGtUdDb6xQCJv2Eq22iGKB 03D0TBfZeVa23DTMUszsK5tsMeyUzfu96VmcyD9A6Cfyp/gXfVAzlMNh8nNKG34k2sL+ fGed+3in1BKyXYCOLIiQboy4RIVpot0yTqvJ/B3Y3FhtsXhA5K660UFgrPH+SoONr1Et D+Y7mO6ZVCJfaXhtsMeVrkT9x65YLvAI20fER0x1ZMegzmyX5AVspLITl63EaHTc1OBp 4WIB716drtKv8ujIW+jbCSJMA33zCzDWsg1gQK+A/rx8eSdXdD9kDzw559daLHJRJBND FuqA==
X-Received: by 10.60.78.201 with SMTP id d9mr16585207oex.47.1441077093137; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.144.65 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Aug 2015 20:11:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <09245052-ABC3-451F-B0F9-BAA1C4E1A5DC@tislabs.com>
References: <46A1A261-E9F4-414D-AAD8-9C85A8B53283@vigilsec.com> <09245052-ABC3-451F-B0F9-BAA1C4E1A5DC@tislabs.com>
From: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 23:11:18 -0400
Message-ID: <CAF4+nEHNYLsoNBTvgUXjEzBBNELh1GgwQES8J+sMcJnBXbBx-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/4ErvHQHg_24VNsS72YK8CiglEhI>
Cc: IETF Gen-ART <gen-art@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname.all@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-trill-pseudonode-nickname-05
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2015 03:11:35 -0000

Hi Sandra,

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Sandra Murphy <sandy@tislabs.com> wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2015, at 5:59 PM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> (3)  In Section 11, we learn that the VLAN membership of all the
>> RBridge ports in an LAALP MUST be the same.  Any inconsistencies in
>> VLAN membership may result in packet loss or non-shortest paths.
>> Is there anything that can be added to the Security Considerations
>> that can help avoid these inconsistencies?
>
> Interesting.  In the trill draft I recently reviewed for secdir (draft-ietf-trill-aa-multi-attach) it makes a similar statement that VLAN membership had to be consistent across all ports on all RBridges in a LAALP.  In that draft, the consistency meant the VLANs could be left out of the protocol packet.

Did you see my response to your secdir review which I send 3 days ago?

>   All enabled VLANs MUST be consistent on all ports connected to an
>   LAALP. So the enabled VLANs need not be included in the AA-LAALP-
>   GROUP-RBRIDGES TRILL APPsub-TLV. They can be locally obtained from
>   the port attached to that LAALP.
>
> I wondered if the LAALP was responsible for ensuring the consistency.  If it is left to the operator configuration, that’s tough.  Turns out there’s a dynamic VLAN registration protocol (VRP), but I could not discover that it is doing a consistency check.
>
> If the draft you are looking at implies inconsistency is a possibility, then it must be that neither the LAALP or VRP ensures the consistency.

As per my previous response to you, as far as I know all existing
LAALPs are proprietary MC-LAG implementations and how they maintain
consistent VLAN enablement on the TRILL switch LAALP ports is out of
scope for the TRILL protocol.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

> —Sandy