Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-dmm-distributed-mobility-anchoring-13

[CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <[e-mail]>]

Dear Joseph,

Thanks a lot for the review. We will improve the security consideration
section by including also some of the considerations mentioned in draft-ietf
-dmm-deployment-models-04, and also by better scoping current text. We
believe we don't need much more in terms of text, as the document is
informational, and the actual security mechanisms for a distributed
anchoring solution would depend on the specifics of that solution. We can
also better reflect that rational in the text.

Thanks,

Carlos

On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:25 AM Joseph Salowey via Datatracker <
[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.
>
> The summary of the review is the document has issues with the security
> considerations section.
>
> The security consideration section is extremely light.  It mainly contains
> text
> from RFC 7333.  It seems that there should be more discussion of security
> as it
> relates to the different configurations and different cases.   Do each of
> these
> cases have the same security properties and require the same types of
> security
> controls?
>
> Are the IPSEC recommendations mentioned in the security considerations of
> draft-ietf-dmm-deployment-models-04 applicable for all the cases?   Should
> these be pointed out in the security considerations section?
>
>
>

-- 
Special Issue "Beyond 5G Evolution":
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics/special_issues/beyond_5g