[secdir] SECDIR Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-10

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Sun, 03 November 2013 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2403811E8169 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:24:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.461
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.461 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.138, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qSIh4yRuG8iU for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:24:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com (mail-lb0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A1821E8115 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:24:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id u14so4756359lbd.8 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 03 Nov 2013 12:24:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=8Z3F++rBGbqenf+os1evM0LOAHGWSGEwZZ1nTcaJLGw=; b=nILbGQHr+QRLCVYGLrI6cEiCW2vUMDQ9AYn7oUytgnjmPhnOteGzK/mhUEZ3EQ3Nc/ 2GMLrPQnXIdtvmUosLlZUw6tcrEEihVBo1GXJvKA2gs/0pVXZHxOvrELDYu7N+viHJDd +IVgo8zlMtMr/BjjGpp+Wzz4/Dlzl3JYlphoe2uYSmHTm93OA9vio4+7FAtPt8vF3Ll9 MkrljBabXGLTzXoPVnkVOJqAMR+OloqGEDh8aHo4mrmijpENqocozrAsfKQth1oWDzwG oDBvPYxXd8NP/VH3Rer2fHKOa9e+UJQW+pPDpqirizz9AAvROqLs7Tq40US6S8KGoIdd Fr+w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.6.169 with SMTP id c9mr2186362laa.28.1383510289524; Sun, 03 Nov 2013 12:24:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.46.98 with HTTP; Sun, 3 Nov 2013 12:24:49 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 15:24:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwheF7FpLnG4bEyKjNtTqgT7mO65qsxFTKUmpzd78xmOtw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-10.all@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01493c0659aced04ea4b971f
Subject: [secdir] SECDIR Review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-10
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: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 20:24:54 -0000

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.

G.709 Optical Transport Network introduces new parameters that need to
be expressible in GMPLS and  OSPF-TE. This drafts adds support within
the existing framework.


The security considerations section appropriately consists of a brief
explanation of why a citation to the existing security framework
document is sufficient and the citation to the relevant document which
is sufficiently recent (2010) for these purposes.


The document raises no new security considerations that need to be
considered since routing is not considered to be a confidentiality or
integrity layer for Internet purposes. If preventing traffic analysis
was desired it would probably be more appropriate to apply link layer
security and flood fill the links in any case.





-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/