Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-centralized-replication-10

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joseph,

Thanks for the review, see below.

On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Joseph Salowey <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Reviewer: Joseph Salowey
> Review result: Has Issues
>
> I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
> ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
> IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
> security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
> these comments just like any other last call comments.
>
> Document is ready with issues.
>
> I think the document has appropriate security considerations.
>
> One issue I see in the document is that in the intro it states:
> "The basic idea is that all ingress RBridges send BUM traffic to a
> centralized
> node, which SHOULD be a distribution tree root, using unicast TRILL
> encapsulation." In section 3 it states : "The centralized node MUST be a
> distribution tree root."
>
> The MUST and SHOULD seem to be at odds here.
>

Indeed, a number of "SHOULD"s were changed in a recent revision to "MUST"s
and it looks like one of the most prominent, in the Abstract, was
overlooked.

Thanks,
Donald (document shepherd)
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]