[secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 27 August 2013 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE3C21E8088 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.657
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.657 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.058, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ESZj76xXOkLb for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2065A21E8085 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] (50-1-98-185.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net []) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.7/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r7RH85gT097288 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <secdir@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:08:06 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 50-1-98-185.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [] claimed to be []
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <13D927ED-EE3B-44AD-9BA9-42AE56C94236@vpnc.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:08:05 -0700
To: secdir <secdir@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Subject: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mpls-return-path-specified-lsp-ping
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:08:09 -0000

This document defines a set of extensions to MPLS to allow the failure detection mode (basically, a ping) to know which path to use in the reply. Given that MPLS is a protocol that is only run between gateways that fully trust each other, there are not many security considerations for such an extensions. The entire Security Considerations section reads:

   Security considerations discussed in [RFC4379] apply to this
   document.  In addition to that, in order to prevent using the
   extension defined in this document for "proxying" any possible
   attacks, the return path LSP MUST have destination to the same node
   where the forward path is from.

That actually seems sufficient, given that the underlying protocol is not meant to have any non-administrative security features.

--Paul Hoffman