Re: [Isis-wg] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-04

"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Fri, 07 April 2017 20:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ED6E120454; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:55:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 1T2rFpNogp1X; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:55:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12D2412741D; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3134; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1491598540; x=1492808140; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=9ewat/gfRoAbKiVjXknzPWDeArjRqHYiOXxr8iIbC7A=; b=J55A6aXL4JQ8UyHHGpoOcizvbC8+EipTscbfAqcf5ksm9OhA8ygbPopQ JClref6zDPCNlZ92MdGrfu7xiPad7n7TxU/k3E29gLZ/wRZpJWCgm81Xz Kc9n5xWPAob3f2hv9RXXQtNbh0kRKWQD0KkjGTsPg7pRON1IVneCYmreN w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AGAgDU++dY/5xdJa1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1NhgQsHg1+KE5FElVeCDyqFeAIag0M/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRU?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAyMRRQwEAgEIDgMDAQEBAwIUDwMCAgIwFAEICAIEAQ0FCIoHDqp4giaKa?= =?us-ascii?q?gEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgQuFQ4RwhSSCOIJfBZx4AYZ/i0+CB4U?= =?us-ascii?q?uihSTfgEfOIEFWxWFHRyBY3WILIENAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,167,1488844800"; d="scan'208";a="228128711"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Apr 2017 20:55:39 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (xch-rcd-001.cisco.com [173.37.102.11]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v37Ktc5h008945 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 7 Apr 2017 20:55:39 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:55:38 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 15:55:38 -0500
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf.all@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-04
Thread-Index: AQHSr90H4gcf2S4v0ECj7j9mrpM816G6YX4Q
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 20:55:38 +0000
Message-ID: <814d03ced1c64f18b20d23c65e7cdf04@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <149159669211.11107.3275242226580240988@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <149159669211.11107.3275242226580240988@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.94.189]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/LwlRUIzO2EAZ9VusAkcs2yaNPlw>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-04
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 20:55:45 -0000

Robert -

Thanx for the review.
Reply inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sparks [mailto:rjsparks@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 1:25 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf.all@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org; isis-wg@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-04
> 
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
> the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call
> comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-04
> Reviewer: Robert Sparks
> Review Date: 2017-04-07
> IETF LC End Date: 2017-04-10
> IESG Telechat date: 2017-04-13
> 
> Summary: Ready for publication as Proposed Standard, but with one possible
> thing to add to the security consideration section
> 
> This document is clear and seems straightforward to implement.
> 
> I think, however, there is an attack possibility you should call out in the
> security considerations section. As home routers are used as examples of
> elements that might use this protocol, consider the case of a malicious party
> wanting to deny service in that home.
> A suborned device in the home could watch for the protocol, and present a
> crafted packet to force the home router(s) to re-start the autoconfiguration
> protocol continually (by claiming to be a duplicate and being careful to make
> it the routers job to restart).
> Having the md5 password configured would mitigate this attack.

[Les:] The draft says two things which are relevant:

3.5.1.  Authentication TLV

   It is RECOMMENDED that IS-IS routers supporting this specification
   offer an option to explicitly configure a single password for HMAC-
   MD5 authentication as specified in[RFC5304].

4.  Security Considerations

   In general, the use of authentication is incompatible with auto-
   configuration as it requires some manual configuration.

It seems to me that these sections adequately cover your point.
???

    Les