[Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 31 May 2019 09:47 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: idr@ietf.org
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAB641201DE; Fri, 31 May 2019 02:47:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kühlewind via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com, idr-chairs@ietf.org, shares@ndzh.com, idr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.97.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
Message-ID: <155929607688.6602.7399415179534572381.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 02:47:56 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/-U50ILUVEuQQ06NE1Ykt6nDD-k4>
Subject: [Idr] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 09:48:03 -0000

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-15: 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:


There is the following statement on the applicability of this approach in the
security consideration section:

“The SR traffic engineering
   policies using the SIDs advertised via BGP-LS are expected to be used
   entirely within this trusted SR domain (e.g. between multiple AS/
   domains within a single provider network).  Therefore, precaution is
   necessary to ensure that the SR information advertised via BGP-LS
   sessions is limited to consumers in a secure manner within this
   trusted SR domain.”

As this is every essential to the scope of the document I would like to see
this earlier in the document, e.g. in the intro, and own applicability section,
or even in the abstract.

One additional comment on the shepherd write-up:
I find the write-up a bit confusing but I assume that this document has wg
consensus, even though it might be rough. There is a request to the IESG to
make a judgment if this approach should be taken forward in general. However,
if there are no technical or security concerns here and there is wg consensus,
I don’t think I understand this request; expect this is not seen as covered by
the charter, however, I don’t think this is indicated in the shepherd write-up.