Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-07

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Wed, 05 June 2019 21:25 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
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 3B93A12013D; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 14:25:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 NH9kYiU682FV; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 14:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1958B12008B; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 14:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id CABEF1E2D8; Wed, 5 Jun 2019 17:26:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 17:26:43 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Cc: Shawn Emery <shawn.emery@gmail.com>, secdir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan.all@ietf.org, Shawn Emery <semery@uccs.edu>
Message-ID: <20190605212643.GB15506@pfrc.org>
References: <CAChzXmbSUko=KsWbAxTNvWAZjLig=hxhj3yAt-keh-hbbg8w8w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmVtPGS3O7K3jzXkjXq91OMHSf_LKGBREqDJZzoAMjZ8pg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmVtPGS3O7K3jzXkjXq91OMHSf_LKGBREqDJZzoAMjZ8pg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/pzKrprVmTp8p5eY9B2yLJh0EOxw>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Review of draft-ietf-bfd-vxlan-07
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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, 05 Jun 2019 21:25:50 -0000

On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 01:40:33PM -0700, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> > Echo BFD is out of scope for the document, but does not describe the
> > reason for this or why state
> > this at all?
> >
> GIM>> I think that the main reason is that the BFD Echo mode is
> underspecified. RFC 5880 defined some of the mechanisms related to the Echo
> mode, but more standardization work may be required.

Speaking as a BFD chair, this is the relevant observation.  BFD Echo is
underspecified to the point where claiming compliance is difficult at best.
In general, it relies on single-hop and the ability to have the remote Echo
client loop the packets. 

This packet loop may not be practical for several encapsulations and thus is
out of scope for such encapsulations.  Whether this is practical for vxlan
today, or in the presence of future extensions to vxlan is left out of scope
for the core proposal.

-- Jeff