[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-07

Carl Wallace via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Tue, 04 June 2024 20:31 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietf.org
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F86C1D6215; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 13:31:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Carl Wallace via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.14.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <171753308626.35064.15856147463671219223@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 13:31:26 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: G55R6F7DE2IYQ2JMW3ZMBH3IKYYBZTL4
X-Message-ID-Hash: G55R6F7DE2IYQ2JMW3ZMBH3IKYYBZTL4
X-MailFrom: noreply@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-secdir.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Reply-To: Carl Wallace <carl@redhoundsoftware.com>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-msd-yang-07
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/TYAHASkAcGPUjpz4LttyIIYrl6c>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/secdir>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:secdir-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:secdir-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:secdir-leave@ietf.org>

Reviewer: Carl Wallace
Review result: Ready

This document defines two YANG modules to define support for MPLS Maximum SID
Depths (MSDs). One module contains definitions for the MSD types defined in the
IANA IGP MSD-Types registry. The other augments YANG modules from several other
RFCs. I am not a YANG expert and made no attempt to verify the YANG modules.
The draft appears to be in good shape overall. The security considerations seem
appropriate to me. A couple of editorial nits are below.

In the second paragraph of the introduction, "IANA the IGP MSD-Types registry"
should probably be "IANA IGP MSD-Types registry." The last paragraph of the
security considerations is unnecessarily indented.