Re: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-06

[Job Snijders <[e-mail]>]

Well, to be fair -07 is less then a day old ;-)

Thank you for your review!

Job

On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 at 10:12, Klaas Wierenga <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Job,
>
> Yes it does (and apologies for not spotting the 07 version).
>
> Klaas
>
>
> On 21 April 2017 at 10:05:43, Job Snijders ([e-mail]) wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:57:38AM +0200, Klaas Wierenga wrote:
> > 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.
> >
> > This document presents examples of how operators may use BGP large
> > communities to support some typical use-cases.
> >
> > In general the document is well written and I have no major issues,
> > and I consider it: ready with nits (see below)
> >
> > My one nit is that even though I think that the statement in the
> security considerations "Operators should note the recommendations in
> Section 11(
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-06#section-11)
> of BGP
> > Operations and Security
> > [RFC7454(https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7454)]” is largely true, it
> > would be useful if the authors would expand a little on that, not
> > being an expert in this field, I am wondering if the use-cases you
> > describe in one way or the other influence the RFC7454 considerations.
>
> In -07 - following the GenART review we expanded the security section,
> does that address your nit?
>
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-grow-large-communities-usage-07.txt
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Job
>
>