Re: [NSIS] AD Review comments on draft-ietf-nsis-req-07.txt

> I do not completely understand your argument for MUST
> implementation of hop-by-hop security. 'Must be
> implemented but not must use' means that there is the
> possibility to use hop-by-hop security in any NE but it
> has to be implemented even if it is never used. 'SHOULD be
> supported' means that it has to be implemented except in
> particular cases. I think it is strong enough.

"SHOULD be supported" does not mean what you say it means.

For practical purposes, if hop-by-hop security is a
must-implement, then failing to do so results in a
non-interoperable implementation.  If hop-by-hop security is
a should-implement, then failing to do so does not result in
a non-interoperable implementation.  Given the consequences
of a successful attack against this protocol, which could
range from dinking with QoS signaling (and all that implies)
to opening firewall pinholes to installing bogus address
maps in a NAT, it seems perfectly reasonable to have
mandatory-to-implement security mechanisms.

Melinda
_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
nsis@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis