Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03

Resending due to bounce from draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-all@ietf.org


On Friday, February 16, 2018 6:06am, "Scott G. Kelly" <scott@hyperthought.com> said:

> 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 Ready with issues.
> 
> From the last line of the abstract, this draft updates RFC 4761 by defining new
> flags in the Control Flags field of the Layer2 Info Extended Community.
> 
> I'm not expert in routing protocols, so I can't say for sure that the one minor
> issue I'm calling out is the only one. The security considerations section is very
> brief, saying only
> 
>    This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security issues
>    inherent in the existing [RFC4271].
> 
> RFC4271 is the BGP4 RFC. I agree that those security considerations apply, but as
> noted in the abstract, this draft updates RFC4761, and since that document calls
> out additional security considerations, don't those also apply here? Shouldn't
> this document's security considerations also reference RFC4761?
> 
> --Scott
> 
> _______________________________________________
> secdir mailing list
> secdir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir
> wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview
>