Re: [lisp] AD Review of draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis-09

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Wed, 04 May 2022 20:14 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6002DC159A2A; Wed, 4 May 2022 13:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y0Xvrapr3g9L; Wed, 4 May 2022 13:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31847C159A23; Wed, 4 May 2022 13:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id s14so2434870plk.8; Wed, 04 May 2022 13:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=oZgcRCsy3sexOBf2w5TxAj8nMy59ME7r6ngjaMGk0aU=; b=oKPFlizHBig0xQUJ7XKi5OTKxUTTjVOCi/wM8bS1Is92z/XKqDCTiVSh5tZJBZ2YH8 5yV6Di/D0/v9sFtxixYSZcK7ObS/9EzK3QxqCqgo4m6HY38CsBv0fiQCpK5T6uFQQACQ EfDq+C8ckxHV0UiaViOF2hCFrhIqUC4Ku+ltA294+/oshHgIkQivmWn6MrUP4rBG3RIv nbPasYnJoLD3F2Gevk75oklgmBaNdBnznxZnilS6rIV0mzCR61w3jtH1eYuduNHo0qv0 0h6Qp/b630uqH7scLWbnZR/YJbiJZvTmFXIDSehdQKjCIpB1ZOiOrMLHGqNBKGKpPytR sjug==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=oZgcRCsy3sexOBf2w5TxAj8nMy59ME7r6ngjaMGk0aU=; b=lRCWz0Nmg/dlNMRGRlTBg2c6EI6z+gZyKO0aDCRbFIZMJ+3oIXrdzpPC+xflODbYny 0cfs3eWh5WPp/2VVlYJXkDqSLr02AdRYTGbFVN3XmBQtHn1taYvRBjR3JjRcTT1O07zB jbGUhQehp0g6kqBeYE3HFEEbgJSZCsB5uDYYyMQWOJRxbcBTQ7OlX5Ovf2jlv4/dq7dX Okzz+M68NVDmm6y+h+bUmnPwcjYWjfFCeLq+Ega+FFPNgnhVFpPEuB92ZRH5cnwhMhfH L1tup/jYHCslgAgK33wlTa/+C3a2WNm66+4jhxkHNCMO0LDXsOzLzaodWHq1c/tjzyxq B/uQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531A6DMupWhZxmbo9nJ8Uz0GWhwfvqo05nn5++cKbsriNC5yXftU M0bg8tNwEPO+bY1U56N5ruA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx2zACETonPECdYNJyKbi+WAqIIQT0bnUB+ZhXNCCPpOSIRT8V7tXlq1zwlHFOVZuVpc7g4nw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3b46:b0:1dc:b314:52e6 with SMTP id ot6-20020a17090b3b4600b001dcb31452e6mr1379278pjb.134.1651695265244; Wed, 04 May 2022 13:14:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-98-234-33-188.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [98.234.33.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g10-20020a170902740a00b0015e8d4eb268sm8769507pll.178.2022.05.04.13.14.24 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 May 2022 13:14:24 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8583C8DA-2597-4346-83BB-00005781C299@gigix.net>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 13:14:22 -0700
Cc: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, lisp-chairs@ietf.org, "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <36EA75F6-8B1E-4527-910C-8B27EFC6618A@gmail.com>
References: <28A9284B-449C-438F-BDE9-31100E97493A@gigix.net> <8583C8DA-2597-4346-83BB-00005781C299@gigix.net>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.80.82.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/K8k5jSU8B_6ZXnBfmc1qZ18ZQDY>
Subject: Re: [lisp] AD Review of draft-ietf-lisp-6834bis-09
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 20:14:27 -0000

> [LI] Having a look to 6830bis:
> Yes, Section 13.2 can be dropped altogether. 6830bis references Section 13.2 in Section 10 and Section 5.3. Both references can be replaced to a reference to 6834bis.
> As for the last two paragraphs: The very last is the text to be put in section 5.3.
> The second last is actually already present in the security section of 6834bis. This should be enough, right?
> I would just add the sentence “Further security considerations on Map-Versioning can be found in [6834bis]” in the paragraph mentioning Map-Versioning in Section 16 “Security Considerations” in 6833bis.

Are you making a comment that 6830bis-37 is not complete?

I'm looking at your other email. I don't have context to your commenting. You didn't provide enough detail if you are referring to -37, -38, or -38-2.

> For 6833bis:
> In Section 5.4 replacing:
> 
> Map-Version Number: When this 12-bit value is non-zero, the Map-
> Reply sender is informing the ITR what the version number is for
> the EID record contained in the Map-Reply. The ETR can allocate
> this number internally but MUST coordinate this value with other
> ETRs for the site. When this value is 0, there is no versioning
> information conveyed. The Map-Version Number can be included in
> Map-Request and Map-Register messages. See Map-Versioning
> [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] for more details.
> 
> With:
> 
> Map-Version Number: 12-bit version number assigned to the EID
> record contained in the Map-Reply. See Map-Versioning
> [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] for more details.
> 
> The above should completely eliminate any duplication.

This is in draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-31 and has been submitted.

Dino