[Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-30
Magnus Nyström via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 08 April 2024 05:17 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 5FE78C14F70E; Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Magnus Nyström via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct.all@ietf.org, idr@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.9.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <171255343637.3005.42205344596392120@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Magnus Nyström <magnusn@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 22:17:16 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/fYulGchhf6oWPWhVWHxqx6WNupI>
Subject: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ct-30
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 05:17:16 -0000
Reviewer: Magnus Nyström Review result: Has Nits Comparing with my original review (-18) the authors have addressed my concerns. There is one remaining, probably smaller, issue: The Security Considerations section states: "In order to mitigate the risk of the diversion of traffic from its intended destination, existing BGPsec solution could be extended and supported for this SAFI." - was this meant to say "existing BGPsec solutions" or "the existing BGP solution"? Also, it isn't clear how BGPsec should be extended - and if it would provide any substantial benefit over the mechanisms described herein (the remainder of this paragraph states: "The restriction of the aplicability of this SAFI to its intended well-defined scope limits the likelihood of traffic diversions. Furthermore, as long as the filtering and appropriate configuration mechanisms discussed previously are applied diligently, risk of the diversion of the traffic is significantly mitigated.").
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Susan Hares
- [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-bgp-c… Magnus Nyström via Datatracker
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Kaliraj Vairavakkalai
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Magnus Nyström
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Magnus Nyström
- [Idr] FW: Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Susan Hares
- [Idr] FW: Secdir early review of draft-ietf-idr-b… Susan Hares