[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10

Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> Tue, 25 December 2018 03:42 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext.all@ietf.org, pce@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154570936991.12911.1627288364179668736@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 19:42:49 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/NTCtnM0DaVBKSo4m9clgdWxdf0o>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-10

Reviewer: Watson Ladd
Review result: Ready

Dear all,

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.

This is a document in an area I know almost nothing about. It appears
to be about an internal mechanism for configuring label based routing
in an optical network to minimize the number of optical to electrical
transitions along the route. I am perhaps a bit confused as to why the
PCC would specify the constraints on wavelengths on hops that are not
the end ones: if the packets must flow from A to B, shouldn't the PCE
be the one to decide how to do that using all the resources available? 

Merry Christmas!

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-pc… Watson Ladd
Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Leeyoung