Re: [Gen-art] [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com> Wed, 27 December 2017 10:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6114C1270A0; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 02:46:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.231
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.231 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 WfgQ_2WN9Wrk; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 02:46:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9F77126D46; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 02:46:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id D9E17ADBA3819; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:46:16 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from BLREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.20.4.41) by lhreml703-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.44) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.361.1; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:46:17 +0000
Received: from BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.9.219]) by BLREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.20.4.41]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Wed, 27 Dec 2017 16:16:03 +0530
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.dhody@huawei.com>
To: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
CC: "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints.all@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04
Thread-Index: AQHTe4imLfGh9AGhpEe/YDzuTGT0NqNW+tlg
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:46:03 +0000
Message-ID: <23CE718903A838468A8B325B80962F9B8D5FBE65@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <151399047747.30010.9137589938000821863@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <151399047747.30010.9137589938000821863@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.149.39]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/OsoRFmdlAg9q69RawgECvAlaKcY>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-04
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 10:46:23 -0000

Hi Brian, 

Thanks for your review. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian Carpenter
> Sent: 23 December 2017 06:25
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: pce@ietf.org; draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints.all@ietf.org
> Subject: [Pce] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-
> codepoints-04
> 
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review result: Ready
> 
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review Date: 2017-12-23
> IETF LC End Date: 2017-12-28
> IESG Telechat date: 2018-01-11
> 
> Summary: Ready
> --------
> 
> Comment:
> --------
> 
> fwiw, I agree with this:
> 
>    [RFC3692] asserts that the existence of experimental code points
>    introduce no new security considerations.  However, implementations
>    accepting experimental codepoints need to take care in how they parse
>    and process the messages, objects, and TLVs in case they come,
>    accidentally, from another experiment.
> 
> There are a few words in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6709#section-5
> that might also be relevant. An experimental code point is in effect a
> protocol extension with unknown security properties.
> 
[[Dhruv Dhody]] We could add this text as per your suggestion -  

   Further, an implementation
   accepting experimental code points needs to consider the security
   aspects of the experimental extensions.  [RFC6709] provide various
   design considerations for protocol extensions (including those
   designated as experimental).

Thanks! 
Dhruv

> _______________________________________________
> Pce mailing list
> Pce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce