[Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-idr-rfc2796bis-01
Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti@qualcomm.com> Wed, 28 September 2005 23:53 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EKljc-0004Cg-E9; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:53:12 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EKlja-0004CV-DX for gen-art@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:53:10 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA21690 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:53:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ithilien.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.59]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EKlr7-0007qT-Aa for gen-art@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:00:59 -0400
Received: from sabrina.qualcomm.com (sabrina.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.150]) by ithilien.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id j8SNqpoV022056; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:52:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LDONDETI.qualcomm.com (ldondeti.na.qualcomm.com [129.46.173.100]) by sabrina.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id j8SNqm7T029423 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <6.2.2.1.2.20050928160937.02f84368@qcmail1.qualcomm.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.2.1
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 16:52:36 -0700
To: gen-art@ietf.org
From: Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti@qualcomm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9
Cc: skh@nexthop.com, yakov@juniper.net, rchandra@redback.com, enke@redback.com, tbates@cisco.com
Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-idr-rfc2796bis-01
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-idr-rfc2796bis-01 (moving towards Draft
Standard status)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background for those who may be unaware of GenART:
GenART is the Area Review Team for the General Area of the IETF.
We advise the General Area Director (i.e., the IETF/IESG chair) by
providing more in depth reviews than he could do himself of documents
that come up for final decision in IESG telechat. I was selected as the
GenART member to review this document. Below is my review, which was
written specifically with an eye to the GenART process, but since I
believe that it will be useful to have these comments more widely
distributed, others outside the GenART group are included.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: Ready with suggestion to update the security considerations
section, and provide some clarifications(*):
1. 2796 contains a format for encoding CLUSTER_LISTs which is not present
in 2796bis. Perhaps there should be an explanation as to why that is not
necessary.
2. ROUTER_ID is now referred to as BGP Identifier. Both terms have been
around for a long while now. Perhaps the authors should explain what they
have in mind in changing that term.
3. The security considerations section points to Ref[5], which if still
correct refers to an RFC published in 1998 to use MD5 and that RFC (2385) says
"This document defines a weak but currently practiced security
mechanism for BGP. It is anticipated that future work will provide
different stronger mechanisms for dealing with these issues."
At the risk of annoying the authors, I wonder if nothing has changed in the
past 7 years to prompt an update to the Security Considerations section.
4. Editorial Nit: Replace "With the existing BGP model," in Page 3 with
something like "In BGP-4"
thanks and regards,
Lakshminath
(*) I used the rfcdiff tool to compare 2796 with 2796bis. That tools is
quite useful!
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
- [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-idr-rfc279… Lakshminath Dondeti