Re: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-isis-bfd-tlv-02

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 26 July 2010 08:14 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B7B3A6A07 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.162, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IO1GhPJXCJX5 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0837C3A6A53 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 01:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:46598 helo=[130.129.114.216]) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1OdIpq-000Njl-8A; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 04:14:54 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p06240808c872f28a1b0d@[130.129.114.216]>
In-Reply-To: <AE36820147909644AD2A7CA014B1FB520B76DF71@xmb-sjc-222.amer.cisco.com>
References: <p06240803c870ffec1816@[10.242.10.151]> <tslsk37ajxs.fsf@mit.edu> <AE36820147909644AD2A7CA014B1FB520B76DF71@xmb-sjc-222.amer.cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 04:12:16 -0400
To: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Cc: "Stewart Bryant \(stbryant\)" <stbryant@cisco.com>, "Chris Hopps \(chopps\)" <chopps@cisco.com>, dward@juniper.com, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] review of draft-ietf-isis-bfd-tlv-02
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 08:14:36 -0000

At 12:55 AM -0700 7/26/10, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) wrote:
>...
>
>The mechanism introduced by this draft is used to determine when/if to
>use BFD session state as a prerequisite to forming an IS-IS adjacency
>and/or to trigger IS-IS adjacency state transitions. It does not make
>any changes to the operation of BFD itself - which I think your wording
>may unintentionally imply. How about:
>
>"The TLV defined within this document describes an addition to the IS-IS
>Hello protocol. Inappropriate use of this TLV could prevent an IS-IS
>adjacency from forming or lead to failure to detect bidirectional
>forwarding failures - each of which is a form of denial of service.
>However, a party who can
>manipulate the contents of this TLV is already in a position to create
>such a denial of service by disrupting IS-IS routing in other ways."
>

That text is much better. I think it is also worth including a 
sentence, as you did later in your message, noting that the use of 
this new TLV in the IS-IS hello exchange is independent of the use of 
authentication for that exchange or for BFD.

Steve