[ippm] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-09: (with DISCUSS)

Andrew Alston via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 30 June 2022 06:42 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846B2C15D863; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 23:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Andrew Alston via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags@ietf.org, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, tpauly@apple.com, tpauly@apple.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 8.5.1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Andrew Alston <andrew-ietf@liquid.tech>
Message-ID: <165657136653.27894.14747473824166575843@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 23:42:46 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/vzmoQzjJ9eNyqiOYmUkXnZEU2lg>
Subject: [ippm] Andrew Alston's Discuss on draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-09: (with DISCUSS)
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 06:42:46 -0000

Andrew Alston has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-flags-09: Discuss

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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:



Thanks for the work on this document.

While I am supporting the other discusses on this document, I would also like
to discuss some of the language in section 8.


 In order to mitigate the performance-related attacks described above,
   as described in Section 7 it should be possible for IOAM-enabled
   devices to selectively apply the mechanisms that use the flags
   defined in this document to a subset of the traffic, and to limit the
   performance of synthetically generated packets to a configurable
   rate.  Specifically, IOAM nodes should be able to:

Considering the serious security considerations in play here - can we consider
making the should here a MUST in both the second and final lines of the above.