Re: [Idr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-16: (with COMMENT)

Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 19 May 2021 03:38 UTC

Return-Path: <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A1B3A1BB1; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 sZes_dGjWKiq; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x230.google.com (mail-oi1-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::230]) (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 97C283A1B8A; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x230.google.com with SMTP id h9so11911353oih.4; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version; bh=bfjCUdNCr+BqlbnrQ4ONmJnUzc6OyeVt6+nI+v6BjXU=; b=lnIgM9xy0+U7lcBQJJ2yzHclV/X6fSFlhybWwNwR6cUJDFFxEtWYqrxFRdMud5Tsu1 GixZdSeLLMc43OanwwRuODga5Rz5EwhAomjvu1fkU1KfkDXQA9m6RrLUp9nwQ3eQy8ZY eGA45N7pMWXodtLp+eUROf9Ppfnlprcy7zkvdzTjLXw4HqdT7hTlkrYUT10JZd75tgO/ /VSvm3lkO6ER2kI9r3gjXCXZ8nyJ5Rb8cYY/OEJhNeO2JM0UTcPiRvw4vu0dXqzPuPNW krW1JwvT8bh1Dsfd8w75GSHjY1Fs5L2fVRXVGt7Y4N04+wnD1g6rxw/xTMzd0N1uguy7 uSXQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version; bh=bfjCUdNCr+BqlbnrQ4ONmJnUzc6OyeVt6+nI+v6BjXU=; b=KkWmnoOOLhabj0Id+KXB5X1Buy5V4AvULKKMZR5hWIEc8C7v0lSaqzqcxMrkRcbuGf F/kgY506lYXWjFYvdnwBPwP7uIh7WFqt4sfeEHT+NAkQNVG8CrmyoApFnVJsYvPuOSpA AwzYt3KLM7qIvE2UW/HnE0UrEx7fX6MRpuy5ivgC3PdvGd/pjZnFFwH0YpsEyk0lupKA 20R9iaKFxiXnAxZIBqcgD44z63qx4RSzMSlGJqH3aeYEED8rVaGtf6QoQpteWV2iFHqr EkLIHIeNYCYIWc9wTMhNNtkNvMHB9zjDbCXgJCM1ur3iZzqK0f0FvBbJ4Fq1dqcG7lSz Mt4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531NN6HXxq9EwpUubVaIy6MYZZK64pGtGpJdMw4g+EQs4ER4S7NM 9ziazDmTOH+w/tauYCQtVgLjiedNPVU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx29NNKn2LLjGUiBe58BWEyZ4yDSb83gPf2RvBaKCYOCZeu1W7B9YNbUXZe7cFPiNf7KN04sg==
X-Received: by 2002:aca:34d6:: with SMTP id b205mr6520447oia.151.1621395503961; Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.10.7.234] ([201.147.203.196]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x3sm4252661otj.8.2021.05.18.20.38.22 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 May 2021 20:38:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 22:38:16 -0500
From: Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution@ietf.org, idr-chairs@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org, Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
Message-ID: <3d06050a-4e2d-44c5-873a-0dc3518655e6@Spark>
In-Reply-To: <162134343909.18873.6150461240123862844@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <162134343909.18873.6150461240123862844@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Readdle-Message-ID: 3d06050a-4e2d-44c5-873a-0dc3518655e6@Spark
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="60a4882e_7724c67e_b163"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/9gaktvATeYnE-A5YpfkTi-n2CeU>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-16: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 19 May 2021 03:38:38 -0000

Hi Roman,

Thanks for your review.

I see your point, practically, this draft uses  BGP-LS (RFC7752) to transport IGP data, and 7752 talks in details about security considerations.
The security section of RFC7308 is indeed quite short.
Would adding references to security sections of  OSPFv2 (RFC 3630), OSPFv3 (RFC 5329) and IS-IS (RFC 5305) work for you?

Thanks!

Cheers,
Jeff
On May 18, 2021, 8:10 AM -0500, Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>rg>, wrote:
> Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution-16: 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 DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-eag-distribution/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Per Section 4 (Security Considerations),
>
> It is assumed that the IGP instances originating this TLV
> will support all the required security (as described in [RFC7308]) in
> order to prevent any security issues when propagating the TLVs into
> BGP-LS.
>
> The Security Considerations (Section 3) of RFC7308 reads "This extension adds
> no new security considerations." What guidance is this sentence providing?
>
>
>