Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3 - draft-ietf-ospf-auth-trai

"Michael Barnes" <michael_barnes@usa.net> Tue, 12 April 2011 03:33 UTC

Return-Path: <michael_barnes@usa.net>
X-Original-To: ospf@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ospf@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D04E06C2 for <ospf@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.532
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EQ4cM4pkEu2h for <ospf@ietfc.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmsout02.mbox.net (cmsout02.mbox.net [165.212.64.32]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4BE5E0698 for <ospf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cmsout02.mbox.net (co02-lo [127.0.0.1]) by cmsout02.mbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE401340D2; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:55 +0000 (GMT)
X-USANET-Received: from cmsout02.mbox.net [127.0.0.1] by cmsout02.mbox.net via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.72B) with ESMTP id 783PDLDhz2864M02; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:51 -0000
X-USANET-Routed: 3 gwsout-vs Q:bmvirus
Received: from cmsapps03.cms.usa.net [165.212.11.132] by cmsout02.mbox.net via smtad (C8.MAIN.3.72B) with ESMTP id XID785PDLDhz3032X02; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:51 -0000
X-USANET-Source: 165.212.11.132 IN michael_barnes@usa.net cmsapps03.cms.usa.net
X-USANET-MsgId: XID785PDLDhz3032X02
Received: from web02.cms.usa.net [165.212.8.202] by cmsapps03.cms.usa.net (ESMTP/michael_barnes@usa.net) via mtad (C8.MAIN.3.72B) with ESMTP id 803PDLDhY3072M39; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:50 -0000
X-USANET-Auth: 165.212.8.202 AUTO michael_barnes@usa.net web02.cms.usa.net
Received: from 198.144.206.23 [198.144.206.23] by web02.cms.usa.net (USANET web-mailer C8.MAIN.3.73O); Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:50 -0000
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:33:50 -0700
From: "Michael Barnes" <michael_barnes@usa.net>
To: <curtis@occnc.com>, Abhay Roy <akr@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: USANET web-mailer (C8.MAIN.3.73O)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <741PDLDGY7792S02.1302579230@web02.cms.usa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID803PDLDhz3072X39
Cc: "ospf@ietf.org" <ospf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3 - draft-ietf-ospf-auth-trai
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 03:33:57 -0000

------ Original Message ------
Received: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 07:43:06 PM PDT
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com>;
To: Abhay Roy <akr@cisco.com>Cc: "ospf@ietf.org"; <ospf@ietf.org>;
Subject: Re: [OSPF] WG Last Call for Supporting Authentication Trailer for
OSPFv3 - draft-ietf-ospf-auth-trailer-ospfv3-03.txt

> 
> In message <4DA329FE.4050108@cisco.com>;
> Abhay Roy writes:
> >  
> > We are starting the Working Group Last Call of this revision of the
> > subject draft.
> >  
> > This drafts is intended to be a Proposed Standard. The OSPF WG last
> > call will begin today and will end at 5pm PST, April 25th, 2011.
> >  
> > Abhay/Acee
> 
> 
> It is weak with only the 32 bit sequence number.  That said, if there
> is concensus for moving forward as-is I have no objection.  It is a
> step in the right direction, though IMHO it is too small a step in the
> right direction and would not have to be revisited quite as soon if
> something more robust were proposed.
> 
> Bottom line.  Falls short of what I'd like to see but no objection.
> 
> Curtis

I agree with Curis. I'd really like to see the first version of this spec at
least have the extended sequence number as is being discussed for v2.

Regards,
Michael