Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Roman,

A -07 version of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname has been
uploaded. I believe this resolves all of your comments.

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


On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Zhangmingui (Martin)
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
> All changes you suggested in item (8) are fair. I've made these changes into the 07 version. Awaiting for uploading.
>
> Thanks,
> Mingui
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Roman Danyliw [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 12:32 AM
>> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
>> [e-mail]
>> Subject: RE: Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
>>
>> Hi Donald and Mingui!
>>
>> Thanks for the changes in -06.  Any thoughts on item (8)?
>>
>> Roman
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roman Danyliw
>> > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 9:01 PM
>> > To: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
>> > draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-
>> > [e-mail]
>> > Subject: Secdir review of
>> > draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> > (8) There appear to be a few instances of key protocol behavior not
>> > using
>> > RFC2119 language.  I'd suggest:
>> >
>> > Section 3.2.2, Global Distribution Tree, Page 6
>> > (old) Also, this border RBridge needs to advertise the set of local
>> > distribution trees by providing another set of nicknames
>> > (new) Also, this border RBridge MUST advertise the set of local
>> > distribution trees by providing another set of nicknames
>> >
>> > Section 3.2.2, Global Distribution Tree, Page 6
>> > (old) If a border RBridge has been assigned both as a global tree root
>> > and a local tree root, it has to acquire both a global tree root
>> > nickname(s) and local tree root nickname(s)
>> > (new) If a border RBridge has been assigned both as a global tree root
>> > and a local tree root, it MUST acquire both a global tree root
>> > nickname(s) and local tree root nickname(s)
>> >
>> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
>> > (old) Besides its own nickname(s), a border RBridge needs to announce,
>> > in its area, the ownership of all external nicknames that are
>> > reachable from this border RBridge.
>> > (new) Besides its own nickname(s), a border RBridge MUST announce, in
>> > its area, the ownership of all external nicknames that are reachable
>> > from this border RBridge.
>> >
>> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
>> > (old) Also, a border RBridge needs to announce, in Level 2, the
>> > ownership of all nicknames within its area. From listening to these
>> > Level 2 announcements, border RBridges can figure out the nicknames used
>> by other areas.
>> > (new) Also, a border RBridge MUST announce, in Level 2, the ownership
>> > of all nicknames within its area. From listening to these Level 2
>> > announcements, border RBridges can figure out the nicknames used by other
>> areas.
>> >
>> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
>> > (old) To address this issue, border RBridges should make use of the
>> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV to advertise into the Level 1 area the
>> > inclusive range of nicknames that are available or not for self
>> > allocation by the Level 1 RBridges in that area.
>> > (new) To address this issue, border RBridges SHOULD use the
>> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV to advertise into the Level 1 area the
>> > inclusive range of nicknames that are available or not for self
>> > allocation by the Level 1 RBridges in that area.
>> >
>> > Section 4.4, Capability Indication, Page 11
>> > (old) If there are RBridges that do not understand the NickBlockFlags
>> > APPsub-TLV, border RBridges of the area will also use the traditional
>> > Nickname Sub-TLV [RFC7176] to announce into the area those nicknames
>> > covered by the nickname blocks of the NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV whose
>> > OK is 0.
>> > (new) If there are RBridges that do not understand the NickBlockFlags
>> > APPsub-TLV, border RBridges of the area MUST also use the traditional
>> > Nickname Sub-TLV [RFC7176] to announce into the area those nicknames
>> > covered by the nickname blocks of the NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV whose
>> > OK is 0.
>> >
>> > Section 5, Mix with Aggregated nickname Areas, Page 11
>> > (old) Usage of nickname space must be planed so that nicknames used in
>> > any one unique nickname area and Level 2 are never used in any other
>> > areas which includes unique nickname areas as well as aggregated nickname
>> areas