[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname-09

Samuel Weiler via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 21 August 2020 17:10 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Samuel Weiler via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname.all@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <159802984090.28806.6174074934791715126@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Samuel Weiler <weiler@csail.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:10:40 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/XRsIMI46ROOSYZ6wwOZ8nZwojdk>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-single-nickname-09

Reviewer: Samuel Weiler
Review result: Ready

Question for WG/authors: how much routing (bridging) instability does this
naming scheme create when new interconnections are added, particularly of
redundant connections (as suggested in Fig 1)?  I'm imagining that
interconnection (and disconnection) happen relatively easily and often and this
this naming scheme might create instability that need not exist when a
redundant link goes up or down.

Other than that: I'm not happy with TRILL's security story, in general, but
this doesn't seem to make it any worse.

[secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-ietf-tr… Samuel Weiler via Datatracker
Re: [secdir] Secdir last call review of draft-iet… Susan Hares