Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-18.txt

Applause,:-)

-Qin
-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
发送时间: 2017年9月6日 2:01
收件人: Dhruv Dhody; pce@ietf.org
抄送: pce-chairs@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-18.txt

Thanks Dhruv for holding the pen on this critical document for PCE and working with the IESG on their comments for improving the document!
Deborah

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dhruv Dhody [mailto:dhruv.dhody@huawei.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2017 11:29 PM
> To: pce@ietf.org
> Cc: pce-chairs@ietf.org; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A <db3546@att.com>; Eric 
> Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
> Subject: RE: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-18.txt
> 
> Hi WG,
> 
> An update is made after discuss with Eric. Thanks Eric for continuing 
> the discussion on your 'discuss'.
> 
> The change made is in the case of TLS negotiation failure after both 
> PCEP peers have sent the StartTLS message.
> 
> OLD:
>    After the exchange of StartTLS messages, if the TLS negotiation fails
>    for some reason (e.g. the required mechanisms for certificate
>    revocation checking are not available), both peers SHOULD immediately
>    close the connection.  Since the initiator has no way to know if the
>    peer is willing to accept PCEP connection without TLS, based on the
>    local policy, it MAY attempt to re-establish the PCEP session without
>    TLS.  The attempt to re-establish the PCEP session without TLS SHOULD
>    be limited to only once.
> NEW:
>    After the exchange of StartTLS messages, if the TLS negotiation fails
>    for some reason (e.g. the required mechanisms for certificate
>    revocation checking are not available), both peers MUST immediately
>    close the connection.
> END
> 
> See diff at - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__www.ietf.org_rfcdiff-3Furl1-3Ddraft-2Dietf-2Dpce-2Dpceps-2D16-26ur
> l2-
> 3Ddraft-2Dietf-2Dpce-2Dpceps-2D18&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-
> o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=qbQiWHiY7dEFAIeOMS3wM7fBMMhozS05d9rnuozvhd
> Q&e=
> 
> With this update all comments during IESG evaluation are handled.
> 
> Thanks!
> Dhruv
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet- 
> > drafts@ietf.org
> > Sent: 05 September 2017 08:47
> > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> > Cc: pce@ietf.org
> > Subject: [Pce] I-D Action: draft-ietf-pce-pceps-18.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> > directories.
> > This draft is a work item of the Path Computation Element WG of the IETF.
> >
> >         Title           : Secure Transport for PCEP
> >         Authors         : Diego R. Lopez
> >                           Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
> >                           Qin Wu
> >                           Dhruv Dhody
> > 	Filename        : draft-ietf-pce-pceps-18.txt
> > 	Pages           : 25
> > 	Date            : 2017-09-04
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) defines
> >    the mechanisms for the communication between a Path Computation
> >    Client (PCC) and a Path Computation Element (PCE), or among PCEs.
> >    This document describes the usage of Transport Layer Security (TLS)
> >    to enhance PCEP security, hence the PCEPS acronym proposed for it.
> >    The additional security mechanisms are provided by the transport
> >    protocol supporting PCEP, and therefore they do not affect the
> >    flexibility and extensibility of PCEP.
> >
> >    This document updates RFC 5440 in regards to the PCEP initialization
> >    phase procedures.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_draft-2Dietf-2Dpce-
> 2Dpceps_&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=qyyOR8SD81Hnixb-
> MgME8Z7L0NovuKCzGNNt7PWYTZg&e=
> >
> > There are also htmlized versions available at:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__tools.ietf.org_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dpce-2Dpceps-
> 2D18&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=TdxXKOIpYfAf6SBw-
> 7ZTgcGNc7BNXp8mmE2rARfT0B4&e=
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__datatracker.ietf.org_doc_html_draft-2Dietf-2Dpce-2Dpceps-
> 2D18&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=NH-
> P1MmkcSTlbBNCgMvFuEBLtNi3dA4EtBY3Pi7p26Q&e=
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__www.ietf.org_rfcdiff-3Furl2-3Ddraft-2Dietf-2Dpce-2Dpceps-
> 2D18&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=H9jEXpSdf44FK0d5-
> K0aFUdXiOi4CDCENXoZe983y40&e=
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
> > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at 
> > tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=ftp-3A__ftp.ietf.org_inte
> > rnet-
> 2Ddrafts_&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-
> o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=PBKMbM2Wyf9AGDUgZVq8QoajUkbvqJMIxW9VWzMk
> dIQ&e=
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pce mailing list
> > Pce@ietf.org
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> 3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_pce&d=DwIFAg&c=LFYZ-
> o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6UhGpW9lwi9dM7jYlxXD8w&m=tVxrnFGyNsSVioJp_ul
> H_-lsuXd-
> o6ODUeSYNzXZM0Q&s=6GAViva04B1Y4b4EJrfxhrRKeBUT36eiFTtplE3YHy4&e=

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce