[secdir] Secdir ietf last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-path-sid-05

Jon Geater via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 25 April 2025 10:53 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jon Geater via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: secdir@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <174557842855.361.15497402926777270960@dt-datatracker-7bd7b9d5d5-79vfh>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 03:53:48 -0700
Message-ID-Hash: ICBJI6EL5QICW7TWQX62IL6WQOYKI35U
CC: draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-path-sid.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, mpls@ietf.org
Reply-To: Jon Geater <jon.geater@rkvst.com>
Subject: [secdir] Secdir ietf last call review of draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-path-sid-05
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/rhXGUFPmRKBRwy8irKzbFIN8X8M>

Document: draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-path-sid
Title: Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping for Segment Routing (SR) Path Segment
Identifier with MPLS Data Plane Reviewer: Jon Geater Review result: Ready

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.

In a largely positive review of draft-04 I found one issue with clarity
and references which was quickly addressed by the authors in a new
draft-05. I wish to thank the authors for their quick and friendly
turn around of the review comments and am satisfied that draft-05
contains appropriate treatment of security concerns.

[secdir] Secdir ietf last call review of draft-ie… Jon Geater via Datatracker
[secdir] Re: Secdir ietf last call review of draf… xiao.min2