Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-impairments-07

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 669AF21F8C63; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.893
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OXOPYgnDcz1e; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a32.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbhh.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.177]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E3521F8C4B; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from homiemail-a32.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a32.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8E358407D; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s= cryptonector.com; b=kRg7wKrMVyDSXQ73H1CfsTgI0+52sqICB3XUukJj4KsD JaNFecxsjHvQqRNueCDcL+CHTqeItpGRcqq/WQRz3w0My3tnT+EDBml17agqxerZ AxcOtxSzP7A/pFiesM0LO0mCVuQeBWsf4OAPoCCxlYH1lgZDKnNPRMvqZHhSvAM=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= cryptonector.com; bh=QCrIVzYlHVLRdWAAHT/K6LpOH04=; b=GA1JFmNtyvO 7fi9zaXCXi04hI1zN16ok93Wk3VF//x0GIjSuAnGJSJ6fezqWA0yplUVuvCleN+O xoO75GYLE8cx2E2pE+FIl204xKZd8WQiM1jDoYCpO6ioD3rIuLgCfVJEKiu8s6c1 ScgkJ/xo1FJY52KBu4mOdswYMjKZD9Dk=
Received: from mail-qy0-f172.google.com (mail-qy0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a32.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DBEA5840B2; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:14:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk34 with SMTP id 34so3067597qyk.10 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.20.135 with SMTP id n7mr3710358pbe.41.1319037259058; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.50.69 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718181C1B@DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAK3OfOj5Y8waYhCpoiiYg0GrL3E5SvWAPkkxmhP+2RHhoDdzgw@mail.gmail.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E171817FEAA@DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CAK3OfOhvV6HwH5i14LqmZX-o4aEzCe3Wk=8iZdg9AnVCXuJcsw@mail.gmail.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1718181C1B@DFWEML501-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:14:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOg=P-g3RZoj8yznEvqU=J6HxOFQeEYS0uY07QBGZ1wDWQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-impairments@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-impairments@tools.ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-impairments-07
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:18:21 -0000

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> wrote:
> As you indicated in the latest response, this document is first of all informational and does not define any new protocols beyond the family of OSPF-TE, RSVP-TE and PCEP. There are no new requirements caused by IA-RWA other than the need for processing additional routing/signaling related data beyond the regular TE networks.
> These additional data would not add any particular security requirements in my opinion.

The fact that this is an informational document doesn't mean there's
no need to be thorough.  On the contrary, since a beginner to the
subject might start by reading the informational documents, this one's
a good place to discuss security issues.

> Anyhow, please see the following changes if you would be satisfied with them.

I'm happy with the proposed text.  Thanks!

Nico
--