[secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-12.txt

Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi> Wed, 01 March 2017 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <kivinen@iki.fi>
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 9AD9912946A; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:01:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.12
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.12 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5mXlMBHJ8623; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:01:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.kivinen.iki.fi (fireball.acr.fi [83.145.195.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 975A012952F; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 07:01:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fireball.acr.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.kivinen.iki.fi (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id v21F13Eh004483 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:01:03 +0200 (EET)
Received: (from kivinen@localhost) by fireball.acr.fi (8.15.2/8.14.8/Submit) id v21F13MU008703; Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:01:03 +0200 (EET)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <22710.57903.142798.950727@fireball.acr.fi>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 17:01:03 +0200
From: Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
To: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm.all@ietf.org
X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 25.1.1 (x86_64--netbsd)
X-Edit-Time: 9 min
X-Total-Time: 8 min
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/j35D7w7rG2STNOO5BnqWZw_xdlU>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-12.txt
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 01 Mar 2017 15:01:10 -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.

This document seems to be problem statement and requirements document
for new MPLS path segment monitoring tool. The title does not really
reflect to that and from there it would look more like that this would
define that actul hitless path segment monitoring mechanism. As this
only provides problem statement and requiremens for it, the title
should be changed to say so.

The security considerations section just refers to rfc5921 and 5860.
As this is problem statement and requirements document, I do not think
there is real security considerations in this document, the protocol
document based on this might then have more considerations.

Nits: The OAM term in the document should be expanded both in the
abstract and in the first use.

Summary: Ready with nits.
-- 
kivinen@iki.fi