[Pce] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-12: (with COMMENT)

Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Wed, 30 October 2019 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: pce@ietf.org
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D83A112000F; Wed, 30 Oct 2019 10:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity@ietf.org, Julien Meuric <julien.meuric@orange.com>, pce-chairs@ietf.org, julien.meuric@orange.com, pce@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.108.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
Message-ID: <157245784988.32527.18104008395862936142.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 10:50:49 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/b2UWeDsfY3yOxmTe4dmFNeFUgR4>
Subject: [Pce] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 17:50:50 -0000

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-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-pce-association-diversity/



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

Section 6.  Per “Also, as stated in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], much of
the information carried in the Disjointness Association object, as per this
document is not extra sensitive”, I appreciate that the language of “not extra
sensitive” comes from Section 8 of draft-ietf-pce-association-group and this
text is merely trying to reiterate this observation.  However, I would
recommend not making any assumptions about the particular environments by
stating the following:

OLD:
Also, as stated in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], much of the information
carried in the Disjointness Association object, as per this document is not
extra sensitive.  It often reflects information that can also be derived from
the LSP Database, but association provides a much easier grouping of related
LSPs and messages.  The disjointness association could provide an adversary
with the opportunity to eavesdrop on the relationship between the LSPs.

NEW
Also, as stated in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], much of the information
carried in the Disjointness Association object reflects information that can
also be derived from the LSP Database, but association provides a much easier
grouping of related LSPs and messages.  The disjointness association could
provide an adversary with the opportunity to eavesdrop on the relationship
between the LSPs and understand the network topology.