Re: [OSPF] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-10: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 29 June 2016 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23A612DEFB; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 07:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.727
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.727 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_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 gRiJAcmOW_8X; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 07:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 188C612DE6E; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 07:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE885BE25; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:25:53 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id acjVCr_filBB; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:25:53 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 42229BE33; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:25:53 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1467210353; bh=SOyAtbxXd0V7sYxmrit1sFK8gNiB3RQl1NnDYMLn7QA=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=wueSbkPpb6Las+5e3e39e4547DjAqKMT17Qkaup/Jn6LANw6AsIFJlnLqgGeKzQyY rtKBzTuDMnuMefFDev4+RcnD5nHhBO1yx8Kd2fU/0OzbFTIaK5zV74Zc2WNkgu+NC8 U8YeOAenPDWVNh4XKfFTeZPz64+G+oVZY1Zffv04=
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <20160629130620.18837.68874.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <D3994D5A.673BD%acee@cisco.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <5773DA71.2060803@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:25:53 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <D3994D5A.673BD%acee@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms090701000407020002020105"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/4EavbHc2_CU28Z4S9fPOq_Mcp-A>
Cc: "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3@ietf.org>, "ospf-chairs@ietf.org" <ospf-chairs@ietf.org>, "wenhu.lu@gmail.com" <wenhu.lu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-10: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ospf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 14:25:57 -0000


On 29/06/16 15:11, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
> I think it would be undesirable for a middlebox to modify OSPF packets
> under any circumstances. I see no requirement for this and, if there were,
> transport of OSPFv3 over IPv4 doesn’t expand or contract the types of
> modifications that a middle box could perform without breaking RFC 7166.
> For both IPv4 and IPv6 transport, the source address is included in the
> authentication digest calculation and cannot be modified.

Lovely!

Thanks,
S.