Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Sat, 17 March 2018 14:52 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.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 A0D4A127867; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 07:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
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 pDI9WiFSOmlK; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 07:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from taper.sei.cmu.edu (taper.sei.cmu.edu [147.72.252.16]) (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 7B7ED1242EA; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 07:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from delp.sei.cmu.edu (delp.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.21.31]) by taper.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w2HEpsQg009557; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:51:54 -0400
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 taper.sei.cmu.edu w2HEpsQg009557
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1521298314; bh=co1ucm33+goGKKUgoK85dR5LuUojUPUgW0wyE5etGZQ=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PMAlZpo6YSg+cpNGgj5nCFcPqMGF48YFoRgfTBWJlB767/R0nUrTCTx0vxWqnCwU7 er/STfFesphKHqsUdfCBz4ouQnUeIAodui6fpMu3Cfo6JGtqGHo8/1ULDUbFNgqVRH NRUOKRU4XoE8lb2kN1ych6GLn+UdlWM8TNJqeGZg=
Received: from CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cascade.ad.sei.cmu.edu [10.64.28.248]) by delp.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id w2HEpmZW042297; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:51:48 -0400
Received: from MARATHON.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.250]) by CASCADE.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([10.64.28.248]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:51:48 -0400
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
CC: "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname.all@ietf.org>, "Zhangmingui (Martin)" <zhangmingui@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
Thread-Index: AdOyXwuroB0yJVJhRMeJvvm4FEzIkQDCKukgABWI5oABmDrDAAB33c1g
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 14:51:46 +0000
Message-ID: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC0137F799F4@marathon>
References: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC0137F6E1D1@marathon> <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC0137F70C6B@marathon> <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E7AAFE7004@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <CAF4+nEGJByC=+A29y6s6FSn9h9=wZsPiGDJ3+pkpo5C+x_2phQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF4+nEGJByC=+A29y6s6FSn9h9=wZsPiGDJ3+pkpo5C+x_2phQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.64.22.6]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/q4m0qOXADjzorfXhhWUZyb7LyE4>
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 14:52:06 -0000

Hello Donald!

Thanks for making these changes in -07.

This addresses all of my feedback.

Roman

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donald Eastlake [mailto:d3e3e3@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 9:31 PM
> To: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>;
> Cc: iesg@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org; draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-
> nickname.all@ietf.org; Zhangmingui (Martin) <zhangmingui@huawei.com>;
> Subject: Re: Secdir review of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> A -07 version of draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname has been uploaded.
> I believe this resolves all of your comments.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> ===============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA  d3e3e3@gmail.com
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 10:15 PM, Zhangmingui (Martin)
> <zhangmingui@huawei.com>; wrote:
> > Hi Roman,
> >
> > All changes you suggested in item (8) are fair. I've made these changes into
> the 07 version. Awaiting for uploading.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mingui
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Roman Danyliw [mailto:rdd@cert.org]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 12:32 AM
> >> To: iesg@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org;
> >> draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname.all@ietf.org
> >> Subject: RE: Secdir review of
> >> draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
> >>
> >> Hi Donald and Mingui!
> >>
> >> Thanks for the changes in -06.  Any thoughts on item (8)?
> >>
> >> Roman
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Roman Danyliw
> >> > Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 9:01 PM
> >> > To: iesg@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org;
> >> > draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-
> >> > nickname.all@ietf.org
> >> > Subject: Secdir review of
> >> > draft-ietf-trill-multilevel-unique-nickname-05
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> > (8) There appear to be a few instances of key protocol behavior not
> >> > using
> >> > RFC2119 language.  I'd suggest:
> >> >
> >> > Section 3.2.2, Global Distribution Tree, Page 6
> >> > (old) Also, this border RBridge needs to advertise the set of local
> >> > distribution trees by providing another set of nicknames
> >> > (new) Also, this border RBridge MUST advertise the set of local
> >> > distribution trees by providing another set of nicknames
> >> >
> >> > Section 3.2.2, Global Distribution Tree, Page 6
> >> > (old) If a border RBridge has been assigned both as a global tree
> >> > root and a local tree root, it has to acquire both a global tree
> >> > root
> >> > nickname(s) and local tree root nickname(s)
> >> > (new) If a border RBridge has been assigned both as a global tree
> >> > root and a local tree root, it MUST acquire both a global tree root
> >> > nickname(s) and local tree root nickname(s)
> >> >
> >> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
> >> > (old) Besides its own nickname(s), a border RBridge needs to
> >> > announce, in its area, the ownership of all external nicknames that
> >> > are reachable from this border RBridge.
> >> > (new) Besides its own nickname(s), a border RBridge MUST announce,
> >> > in its area, the ownership of all external nicknames that are
> >> > reachable from this border RBridge.
> >> >
> >> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
> >> > (old) Also, a border RBridge needs to announce, in Level 2, the
> >> > ownership of all nicknames within its area. From listening to these
> >> > Level 2 announcements, border RBridges can figure out the nicknames
> >> > used
> >> by other areas.
> >> > (new) Also, a border RBridge MUST announce, in Level 2, the
> >> > ownership of all nicknames within its area. From listening to these
> >> > Level 2 announcements, border RBridges can figure out the nicknames
> >> > used by other
> >> areas.
> >> >
> >> > Section 4.3, Nickname Announcements, Page 9
> >> > (old) To address this issue, border RBridges should make use of the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV to advertise into the Level 1 area the
> >> > inclusive range of nicknames that are available or not for self
> >> > allocation by the Level 1 RBridges in that area.
> >> > (new) To address this issue, border RBridges SHOULD use the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV to advertise into the Level 1 area the
> >> > inclusive range of nicknames that are available or not for self
> >> > allocation by the Level 1 RBridges in that area.
> >> >
> >> > Section 4.4, Capability Indication, Page 11
> >> > (old) If there are RBridges that do not understand the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV, border RBridges of the area will also
> >> > use the traditional Nickname Sub-TLV [RFC7176] to announce into the
> >> > area those nicknames covered by the nickname blocks of the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV whose OK is 0.
> >> > (new) If there are RBridges that do not understand the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV, border RBridges of the area MUST also
> >> > use the traditional Nickname Sub-TLV [RFC7176] to announce into the
> >> > area those nicknames covered by the nickname blocks of the
> >> > NickBlockFlags APPsub-TLV whose OK is 0.
> >> >
> >> > Section 5, Mix with Aggregated nickname Areas, Page 11
> >> > (old) Usage of nickname space must be planed so that nicknames used
> >> > in any one unique nickname area and Level 2 are never used in any
> >> > other areas which includes unique nickname areas as well as
> >> > aggregated nickname
> >> areas