Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-trill-rfc6439bis-03

Hi Shawn,

Thanks for your comments. See below.

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Shawn M Emery <shawn.emery@oracle.com> 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 draft updates the Appointed Forwarders mechanism (RFC 6439);
> which supports multiple TRILL switches that handle native traffic
> to and from end stations on a single link.
>
> The security considerations section does exist and states that this
> update does not change the security properties of the TRILL base
> protocol.  The section goes on to state that the Port-Shutdown message
> SHOULD be secured through the Tunnel Channel protocol (which is in draft
> state).  Was this intended to be a normative reference?

That reference is out of date. draft-ietf-trill-channel-tunnel has
issued as RFC 7978. That should be updated and I agree that this
should be a normative reference.

>                                                                                           The section quickly
> finishes with a reference to Authentication TLVs as a way to secure E-LICS
> FS-LSPs traffic.  I'm not a TRILL expert and therefore find it difficult to
> distinguish between the usage of Tunnel Channels and Authentication TLVs for
> securing Port Shutdown messaging.  Could you please clarify?

"Channel Tunnel", although left in the draft name for convenience, was
basically changed to RBridge Header Extension. This is a way to add a
layer of header to RBridge Channel messages (specified in RFC 7178) to
secure their content. The Authentication TLV is an IS-IS TLV and
including that TLV in an IS-IS PDU can be used to secure the content
of the PDU. Some text can be added to clarify this.

> General comments:
>
> None.
>
> Editorial comments:
>
> s/the need to "inhibition"/the need for "inhibition"/
> s/forarding/forwarding/
> s/two optimization/two optimizations/
> s/messages are build/messages are built/

Thanks for spotting those. We'll fix them.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 d3e3e3@gmail.com

> Shawn.
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> secdir mailing list
> secdir@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir
> wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview