Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo-07

<bruno.decraene@orange.com> Tue, 27 February 2018 10:57 UTC

Return-Path: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
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 6A0D1128959; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 02:57:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.629
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.629 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 56L0JEvSXnJH; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 02:57:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orange.com (mta241.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4D9B1200F1; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 02:57:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by opfedar22.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7AD566149C; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:57:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.75]) by opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 5BD15180073; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:57:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::e92a:c932:907e:8f06]) by OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::65de:2f08:41e6:ebbe%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:57:35 +0100
From: <bruno.decraene@orange.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: "draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo.all@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: secdir review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo-07
Thread-Index: AQHTpdhD0cjOCtUzOESk7b49x53dv6Ol+QIA///nyICAADYagIAAyZUggABqXICAENx48A==
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:57:34 +0000
Message-ID: <3035_1519729055_5A95399F_3035_25_10_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A479AF8F3@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <20180214211017.GI12363@mit.edu> <9677_1518711435_5A85B28A_9677_280_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4799B57B@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <EDE93099-A028-4A97-9ECB-49983E2B7A9D@cisco.com> <20180216000410.GP12363@mit.edu> <23454_1518784454_5A86CFC6_23454_358_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A4799CED8@OPEXCLILM21.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <20180216182620.GA12363@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20180216182620.GA12363@mit.edu>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/zAd86aULgenTpaEZ6xsWOW-mUMQ>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo-07
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: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:57:38 -0000

Hi Benjamin,

> From: Benjamin Kaduk [mailto:kaduk@mit.edu]
 > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2018 7:26 PM
> 
 > [inline, trimming a bunch of agreed-upon stuff]
> 
 > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:34:13PM +0000, bruno.decraene@orange.com wrote:
 > > Hi Benjamin,
 > >
 > > > From: Benjamin Kaduk [mailto:kaduk@mit.edu]
 > >  > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2018 1:04 AM
 > > >
 > >  > [also inline]
 > >
 > > Please see inline [Bruno2]
 > >
 > >  > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 07:50:34PM +0000, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote:
 > >  > > Hi Bruno, Benjamin,
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Thanks to Benjamin for review and Bruno for the detailed response. See my responses
 > preceded
 > >  > by [Acee].
 > >  > >
 > >  > >
 > >  > > ´╗┐On 2/15/18, 11:17 AM, "bruno.decraene@orange.com"; <bruno.decraene@orange.com>;
 > wrote:
 > >  > >
 > >  > >
 > >  > >      > In section 3, we talk of "computation of the routing table, by the
 > >  > >      > IGP", which gets me confused about whether "the IGP" represents a
 > >  > >      > network protocol for conveying (e.g.) link state information, an
 > >  > >      > algorithm for SPF computation, or a router that performs SPF
 > >  > >      > computations.
 > >  > >
 > >  > >     [Bruno] IGP is usually a protocol. In this sentence, it is meant as the IGP process of the
 > router.
 > >  > >     Again, I'm open to reformulation. "Acee, any opinion on this?"
 > >  > >
 > >  > > [Acee] I don't think we need to change this. IGP is a well-known acronym.
 > >  > >              https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt
 > >  >
 > >  > Perhaps my question was not well phrased.  I propose
 > >  >
 > >  > OLD: computation of the routing table, by the IGP
 > >  >
 > >  > NEW: computation of the routing table, by the IGP participant
 > >  >
 > >  > (or something similar), since the IGP just serves to distribute the
 > >  > LSDB (conceptually), and the computation of the routing table is
 > >  > done by each router internally (i.e., not directly using the IGP in
 > >  > question).  Or is the previous sentence not true?
 > >
 > > [Bruno2] What about:
 > > NEW:  Computation of the routing table, by the IGP implementation,
 > >
 > > ("IGP participant" does not sound like an usual term to me)
 > 
 > That works for me.  Thanks again!

Thanks to you.

Just to let you know that -08 has been uploaded.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo-08

Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtgwg-backoff-algo-08

--Bruno 
 > -Ben

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.