Re: [secdir] RESEND: Secdir review of draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-14.txt

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

Hi Charlie

Thank you for the review.
>
> The only thing that came to my mind that relates to security that was 
> not discussed was emergent errors, where the pseudowire could 
> introduce an error not detectable at its endpoints that could 
> nevertheless cause problems at a higher layer. Examples would be a 
> pseudowire that duplicated, selectively lost, or reordered packets. 
> There are also interesting problems to be had where the pseudowire 
> capacity is variable and its carrying capacity falls below the higher 
> layer protocol’s ability to use it. An example would be a link between 
> two routers that should be declared down when it gets slow enough so 
> that higher layers will find better routes. Even so, any such 
> discussion would belong in a different document.
>

The issue of capacity and congestion has been the subject of 
longstanding discussion with the Transport Area. There is text in the PW 
framework RFCs on topics similar to those that you highlight above.

The problem is substantially mitigated by the fact that PW are usually 
deployed as part of a service provider offering and are thus subject to 
capacity planing and reliability network engineering considerations, and 
are likely to be monitored by the provider.

Regards

Stewart