[OSPF] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-12: (with COMMENT)

"Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 19 August 2015 15:51 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 B56091B2ACA; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 okHBfs44PAMf; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C5421B2AB6; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.4.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20150819155147.21612.11511.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 08:51:47 -0700
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ospf/Wo5-937kjq_qq_nTwOMDfTFZI1g>
Cc: ospf@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr.shepherd@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr.ad@ietf.org, ospf-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [OSPF] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 19 Aug 2015 15:51:48 -0000

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ospf-prefix-link-attr-12: No Objection

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-prefix-link-attr/



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


- The opaque ID field descriptions in sections 2 and 3 read a
little oddly to me. What happens if someone decides to use up
ID=0? Does that mean they can't overwrite that value until
much later maybe? And what if a whole bunch of routers choose
the same value (because it's configured or hard-coded)? I
think you need a bit more text on that. And with only 24 bits
the probability of a collision if you just pick randomly isn't
that low, so I'm not sure if random selection is a good plan
here either. (How often will a new one of these be seen?)

- Do these opaque values get forwarded widely? If so, then I
guess they may provide a covert channel. I didn't see that
mentioned in the security considerations of RFC5250. Is it
mentioned elsewhere? If not, is it worth a mention here?
(Probably not, but thought I'd ask.)

- Thanks for section 5. Nice to see. (Makes me wonder what
those implementations do with the opaque ID though:-)