Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-04

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Thu, 24 September 2015 18:03 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027D51B30D8; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 fYwhMwhl1Rt7; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x236.google.com (mail-oi0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5E681A870C; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by oixx17 with SMTP id x17so45725757oix.0; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=on2BqUQ2Rd6iRNJ9PUVfk2FjAUcBm5Us438RMv+KR5g=; b=KlGO0x40Jt4oO862ads+FOUh64K9QsrtKb6iJLZCteHkBBGkEstGXp/8EE1H0tUC17 bTbhuwsfEnrV38voX4V8zqfpEcHEYk2c730+gcvlMbn/xsTIWxLrJuUZyrj7T6mPFZfW 0Lv1q2aB6wEqFlHBtZ5YDpdgfZUGduYanSSe/QABzMes4P3J+70UGyObVmidqh18FD6J 50fOQ/wOTa+QauTsHmHsb6e9SYNHsbmLIuGxlRlzNQpRcRnPxeF8ef+OMxnJPcObX3qh pgQOT2FhRzNYvc9cUvxrg4mypOzHWpvZ/fsFdaB9Y1zZc61LBUGXQTRHzqEhYrNNRZbS Kyng==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.175.88 with SMTP id y85mr636970oie.22.1443117826105; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.55.170 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:03:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ABA2F0CE-A287-4F5D-963F-963292AEAEFD@gredler.at>
References: <CAG4d1rdCDNrk+Hn0SkSx1LeRfSUHr+LLSJ8LR-k5ui6WUm0h3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4d1rfOa9M8adSxocHka0wYL7wZbUP94ujGC9CW16QOiSBEfA@mail.gmail.com> <D2272216.30E2B%acee@cisco.com> <BY1PR0501MB13813D6AF5B739F98D9383E9D5430@BY1PR0501MB1381.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <ABA2F0CE-A287-4F5D-963F-963292AEAEFD@gredler.at>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:03:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rdCPKTQE+bpXv3H_JPDe=pHJk4AD5YdUwDLpcPcOKCkUg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Hannes Gredler <hannes@gredler.at>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ce4c864e9770520820dd8
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/4OHPMKVeGeAtM3JX2A-JSs3SFqg>
Cc: OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-04
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 18:03:50 -0000

Hannes,

On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Hannes Gredler <hannes@gredler.at> wrote:

> i can be moved to contributors list as well if it helps.
>

Thanks - that would get us to 5 authors, which is the RFC Editor limit.

Practically, having watched through many of these AUTH48 periods - they
really
drag on with lots of authors.

Thanks,
Alia



> On 24.09.2015, at 19:27, Shraddha Hegde <shraddha@juniper.net> wrote:
>
> Alia,
>
>
>
> Thank you very much for the review and comments.
>
> I have updated the draft and draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-05 is posted.
>
>
>
> Authors list has been reduced to 6 and one author moved to contributor’s
> list.
>
> Here is the list of other comments and resolutions
>
>
>
> 1) In the abstract: "This optional operational capability allows to
>
>    express and act upon locally-defined network policy which considers
>
>    node properties conveyed by tags."
>
>
>
>    What is the subject that "to express and act upon"?  Is it a router?
>
>    Please clean up.
>
> <Shraddha>changed  to
>
> “The node-tags can be used to express and apply locally-defined
>
> network policies which is a very useful operational capability.”
>
>
>
>
>
> 2) In Sec 3.2: "The TLV SHOULD be considered an unordered list."  Perhaps
>
>    "the value contents of the TLV" or something that makes it clearer?
>
> <Shraddha>Changed to
>
> “The administrative tag list within the TLV SHOULD be considered
>
> an unordered list.”
>
>
>
>
>
> 3) In Sec 4.3: " [RFC7490] proposed method of"  should be
>
>    "[RFC7490] defines a method of"
>
> <Shraddha> Updated
>
>
>
> 4) In Sec 5, I'm fairly certain that admin tags can leak additional
>
>    information to an IGP snooper.  It would be useful to have some thoughts
>
>    about that.
>
> <Shraddha>
>
> Node admin tags may be used by operators to indicate geographical location
> or other
>
> sensitive information.
>
> As indicated in <xref target="RFC2328"/> and <xref target="RFC5340"/> OSPF
> authentication
>
> mechanisms do not provide  confidentiality and the information carried in
> node admin tags could be leaked to an IGP
>
> snooper.
>
>
>
> 5) In IANA considerations, please duplicated the suggested value (10) that
>
>    was mentioned in Sec 3.1
>
>
>
> <Shraddha> Updated
>
>
>
> Rgds
>
> Shraddha
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Acee Lindem (acee) [mailto:acee@cisco.com <acee@cisco.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 23, 2015 1:01 AM
> *To:* Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>om>; OSPF List <ospf@ietf.org>rg>;
> draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-04
>
>
>
> Thanks Alias - Speaking as Document Shepherd…
>
>
>
> Authors,
>
>
>
> Please let me know if you require any assistance - these all seem like
> good comments.
>
>
>
> *From: *OSPF <ospf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Alia Atlas <
> akatlas@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 3:02 PM
> *To: *OSPF WG List <ospf@ietf.org>rg>, "
> draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag@ietf.org" <
> draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [OSPF] AD review of draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-04
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As is customary, I have done my AD review of
> draft-ietf-ospf-node-admin-tag-04
>
> before requesting IETF Last Call.
>
>
>
> First, I'd like to thank the working group and Shraddha, Harish, Hannes,
> Rob,
>
> Anton, Zhenbin, and Bruno for their hard work on the draft.  However, this
> short
>
> draft has 7 authors, which is a couple over the author limit for RFCs.
> Experience
>
> has shown that it takes much longer to process a draft through AUTH48 and
> the
>
> other steps necessary (responsiveness to comments, agreement, etc) with a
> large
>
> number of authors.  While I am willing to be persuaded - on or off list -
> that all 7
>
> of the current authors are actively editing, I would prefer that a smaller
> number be
>
> selected as the active editors.
>
>
>
> In some cases, a draft represents a multi-vendor effort requiring a
> significant commitment from more than 5 authors and I’d specifically
> request a deviation from the author limit. I don’t see this to be the case
> with this draft.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> While that discussion is ongoing, here are my technical comments.  In
> general,
>
> the draft is in good shape but could use some English grammar editing; I
> have not
>
> tried to indicate all the places where "the" is missing, for instance.
>
>
>
> 1) In the abstract: "This optional operational capability allows to
>
>    express and act upon locally-defined network policy which considers
>
>    node properties conveyed by tags."
>
>
>
>    What is the subject that "to express and act upon"?  Is it a router?
>
>    Please clean up.
>
>
>
> 2) In Sec 3.2: "The TLV SHOULD be considered an unordered list."  Perhaps
>
>    "the value contents of the TLV" or something that makes it clearer?
>
>
>
> 3) In Sec 4.3: " [RFC7490] proposed method of"  should be
>
>    "[RFC7490] defines a method of"
>
>
>
> 4) In Sec 5, I'm fairly certain that admin tags can leak additional
>
>    information to an IGP snooper.  It would be useful to have some thoughts
>
>    about that.
>
>
>
> When you include this, be sure and point out the the attacker would also
> require knowledge of the policies corresponding to the tags. I’d also point
> out that the policies and advertised tags are local to the OSPF routing
> domain as is done in RFC 5530.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Acee
>
>
>
>
>
> 5) In IANA considerations, please duplicated the suggested value (10) that
>
>    was mentioned in Sec 3.1
>
>
>
> Thanks again for the hard work.  The sooner we resolve whom the editors
> are,
>
> the sooner this draft can proceed.  Ideally, if updated by Thursday, it
> could enter
>
> IETF Last Call and make the IESG telechat on Oct 17.
>
>
>
> Oct 15 that is.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Alia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>