[Isis-wg] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with COMMENT)
"Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 04 February 2016 13:48 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B64781B2F93; Thu, 4 Feb 2016 05:48:45 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160204134845.29169.49616.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 05:48:45 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/P1bJi021N9qkh-gXLtq12qyD-P8>
Cc: isis-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions@ietf.org, isis-wg@ietf.org
Subject: [Isis-wg] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 13:48:45 -0000
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions-09: 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: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-te-metric-extensions/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Couldn't exposing these metrics (e.g. to a passive attacker) help the attacker decide which part(s) of a network to attack or help the attacke to measure the effectiveness of some other attack they have mounted? (E.g. a physical attack on fibre) I think that is worth noting in section 11, perhaps with guidance that sending this information in clear over less trusted parts of the network might best be avoided, e.g. by encrypting that traffic? Put another way... I agree with Alissa's 2nd discuss point, but I'd argue that the proposed re-phrasing (from mail from Stefano on Feb 2nd) ought include the above and not only say "might be sensitive." - Would it be worth noting that if a future specification allows some control node or router to ask another to emit these metrics, then that future specification will need to consider (abuse of) that control interface as a new attack vector?
- [Isis-wg] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Isis-wg] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on d… Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)