[OSPF] Jari Arkko's Yes on draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-11: (with COMMENT)

"Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Wed, 29 June 2016 22:11 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B03912D8B3; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:11:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.25.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160629221139.30479.45903.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 15:11:39 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/9dU_2yp0IQ1Y_xus8dG1oxqE25g>
Cc: ospf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3@ietf.org, ospf-chairs@ietf.org, wenhu.lu@gmail.com
Subject: [OSPF] Jari Arkko's Yes on draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-11: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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 22:11:39 -0000

Jari Arkko has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3-11: Yes

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-ospf-transition-to-ospfv3/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I support this document going forward.

However, in Section 4 it says:

   Consequently, an OSPFv3 packet
   transported within an IPv4 packet requires IPsec to provide
   authentication and confidentiality.  Further work such as [ipsecospf]
   would be required to support IPsec protection for OSPFv3 over IPv4
   transport.

And I had trouble understanding what you meant by this, exactly. IPsec is
required, but is not currently completely enough defined for OSPF to make
this possible? If so, I'd suggest using the words:

   Consequently, an OSPFv3 packet
   transported within an IPv4 packet requires IPsec to provide
   authentication and confidentiality.  However,  further work such as
[ipsecospf]
   would be required to support IPsec protection for OSPFv3 over IPv4
   transport.

But maybe I am misunderstanding what was meant here.