Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname-09
Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com> Fri, 21 August 2020 17:15 UTC
Return-Path: <shares@ndzh.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 979973A094E; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.948
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.948 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DOS_OUTLOOK_TO_MX=2.845, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id psDlR0aPntqQ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:15:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hickoryhill-consulting.com (50-245-122-97-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.245.122.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D58F3A0930; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:15:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=174.25.170.45;
From: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>
To: 'Samuel Weiler' <weiler@csail.mit.edu>, secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname.all@ietf.org
References: <159802984090.28806.6174074934791715126@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <159802984090.28806.6174074934791715126@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 13:14:40 -0400
Message-ID: <01de01d677de$90c62c80$b2528580$@ndzh.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQMkAZm0yr5XmaXrrgr+BH7yMpe6uKanuZbQ
X-Antivirus: AVG (VPS 200821-2, 08/21/2020), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Not-Tested
X-Authenticated-User: skh@ndzh.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/GwLUCCWCYYAJbH6M06bdRnFrjx4>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname-09
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 17:15:10 -0000
Samuel: Can you tell me why you are not happy with TRILL's security situation? Are you unhappy with IS-IS security situation? Shepherd, Susan Hares -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Weiler via Datatracker [mailto:noreply@ietf.org] Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 1:11 PM To: secdir@ietf.org Cc: last-call@ietf.org; draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname.all@ietf.org Subject: Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname-09 Reviewer: Samuel Weiler Review result: Ready Question for WG/authors: how much routing (bridging) instability does this naming scheme create when new interconnections are added, particularly of redundant connections (as suggested in Fig 1)? I'm imagining that interconnection (and disconnection) happen relatively easily and often and this this naming scheme might create instability that need not exist when a redundant link goes up or down. Other than that: I'm not happy with TRILL's security story, in general, but this doesn't seem to make it any worse.
- [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-tr… Samuel Weiler via Datatracker
- Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Susan Hares