[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-protocol-14

Stefan Santesson <stefan@aaa-sec.com> Mon, 11 January 2010 04:45 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan@aaa-sec.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 6D81A28C124 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 20:45:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.998, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 O0Y3ZZ1quIEi for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 20:45:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from s87.loopia.se (s87.loopia.se [194.9.95.114]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D4228C125 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jan 2010 20:45:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from s29.loopia.se (s34.loopia.se [194.9.94.70]) by s87.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4FD2BB274 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: (qmail 76672 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2010 23:28:46 -0000
Received: from 213-64-142-247-no153.business.telia.com (HELO MacBookPro-6.local) (stefan@fiddler.nu@[213.64.142.247]) (envelope-sender <stefan@aaa-sec.com>) by s29.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <iesg@ietf.org>; 10 Jan 2010 23:28:46 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by MacBookPro-6.local (PGP Universal service); Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:46 +0100
X-PGP-Universal: processed; by MacBookPro-6.local on Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:46 +0100
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.23.0.091001
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:28:44 +0100
From: Stefan Santesson <stefan@aaa-sec.com>
To: iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org, Radia Perlman <Radia.Perlman@sun.com>, Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>, Dinesh Dutt <ddutt@cisco.com>, Silvano Gai <sgai@cisco.com>, Anoop Ghanwani <anoop@brocade.com>, Erik Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com>, Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <C770213C.7A2C%stefan@aaa-sec.com>
Thread-Topic: secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-protocol-14
Thread-Index: AcqSTKZg2dMzVp1nQUGj/T06wjBEeA==
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3346014525_17267650"
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-protocol-14
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, 11 Jan 2010 04:45:37 -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.

I have limited my review to security related issues and whether the document
have a reasonable security considerations section.
I have not reviewed the technical content of the document.

The document seems sound form a security perspective. The security
considerations section is clear on the fact layer 2 bridging is not
inherently secure but appears to make a reasonable job at describing
guidance on how to address various security issues related to this protocol.

I find no major issues that the security ADs should be aware of.

/Stefan