Re: [secdir] SecDir review of draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Warren,

Sorry to have disappointed you.

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Warren Kumari [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: 29 November 2013 22:03
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Cc: Warren Kumari
> Subject: SecDir review of draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints
> 
> Be ye not afraid...
> 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.
> 
> Summary: LGTM.
> 
> Version reviewed:
> Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation
> Element communication Protocol
> draft-ietf-pce-vendor-constraints-11.txt
> 
> 
> Notes: I did *not* perform a formal language check. At a quick glance it looks
> good though.
> 
> Nits: I would like to have a table of contents. This may be a personal
preference
> though..
> 
> While performing this review I kept thinking "Mwahaha. This can be used to
carry
> arbitrary information with any PCEP object that supports TLVs....  I can
kvetch
> about the
> DoS potential". But, the authors foiled my plan to rant by mentioning this in
the
> Security Considerations section and even mentioning a mitigation.
> Curses! Foiled again.
> 
> W
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Outside of a dog, a book is your best friend, and inside of a dog, it's too
dark to
> read