Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane-04

Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com> Tue, 14 December 2010 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <turners@ieca.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 A14383A6FB9 for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:18:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.076, BAYES_00=-2.599, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 evfCxnqkZhsL for <secdir@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:18:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nm28-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com (nm28-vm0.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com [98.139.91.234]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 98C4F3A6FB6 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Dec 2010 08:18:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [98.139.91.64] by nm28.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2010 16:20:05 -0000
Received: from [98.139.91.57] by tm4.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2010 16:20:05 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1057.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 14 Dec 2010 16:20:05 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 446793.82999.bm@omp1057.mail.sp2.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 77198 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2010 16:20:05 -0000
Received: from thunderfish.local (turners@96.231.115.248 with plain) by smtp112.biz.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Dec 2010 08:20:04 -0800 PST
X-Yahoo-SMTP: ZrP3VLSswBDL75pF8ymZHDSu9B.vcMfDPgLJ
X-YMail-OSG: RbEeS48VM1lgstZYDpTFdmnyJH2oqztmbeK3HIFIrunED3o Jy_tNhMIc6xms5DY3t_MgIZdwKoExJ2WAfGcxF0s.ygsNP8rSrXjVrKgl_Sa XfXYDt2J48jEV_OzvwZ1cGYTObX6h4A16hPABBrUoyifyVO3vKd9YJYlmHFo gMt8kYmDalNVFSn6wZXYLAPu5n8.gFEdwom8YJm5_7TQfqCrqv9zlqy.TxWz fUvx9vdzGxShDn5BEewPy4Xj32.yAHKi1dDQ2g2l6YxANTKvs_HuPNeVM_0s j6XkpNfXROzIc3DwDyLiOdq_N096pwBjAgA--
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <4D079933.2080302@ieca.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 11:20:03 -0500
From: Sean Turner <turners@ieca.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
References: <001201cb9b59$acd02d70$06708850$@net> <4D07926A.9030007@ieca.com> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B02F2A46AC@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B02F2A46AC@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane@tools.ietf.org>, "opsec-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <opsec-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane-04
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: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:18:28 -0000

Note that the example filters in the Appendicies will also need to be fixed.

spt

On 12/14/10 11:04 AM, Ronald Bonica wrote:
> Authors,
>
> I think that we can correct this problem with an RFC editors note before the telechat on Thursday. Could one of you please provide the updated text?
>
>                                      Ron
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Sean Turner
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 10:51 AM
>> To: Glen Zorn; draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane@tools.ietf.org
>> Cc: opsec-chairs@tools.ietf.org; iesg@ietf.org; secdir@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: secdir review of draft-ietf-opsec-protect-control-plane-04
>>
>> I hoping that this was a typo.  I pulled out all the registered RADIUS
>> ports from http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers and 1645/1646:
>>
>> sightline       1645/tcp  SightLine
>> sightline       1645/udp  SightLine
>> #                         admin<iana&sightlinesystems.com>
>> sa-msg-port     1646/tcp  sa-msg-port
>> sa-msg-port     1646/udp  sa-msg-port
>> #                         Eric Whitehill<Eric.Whitehill&itt.com>
>>
>>
>> radius          1812/tcp    RADIUS
>> radius          1812/udp    RADIUS
>> #                           [RFC2865]
>> radius-acct     1813/tcp    RADIUS Accounting
>> radius-acct     1813/udp    RADIUS Accounting
>> #                           [RFC2866]
>> radsec          2083/tcp   Secure Radius Service
>> radsec          2083/udp   Secure Radius Service
>> #                          Mike McCauley<mikem&open.com.au>  May 2005
>> radius-dynauth  3799/tcp   RADIUS Dynamic Authorization
>> radius-dynauth  3799/udp   RADIUS Dynamic Authorization
>> #                          RFC 3576 - July 2003
>>
>> Should 1812&  1813 be listed or also 2083&  3799?
>>
>> spt
>>
>> On 12/14/10 1:39 AM, Glen Zorn wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Section 3.1 says:
>>>
>>>      o  Permit RADIUS authentication and accounting replies from
>> RADIUS
>>>         servers 198.51.100.9, 198.51.100.10, 2001:DB8:100::9, and
>> 2001:
>>>         DB8:100::10 that are listening on UDP ports 1645 and 1646.
>> Note
>>>         that this doesn't account for a server using Internet Assigned
>>>         Numbers Authority (IANA) ports 1812 and 1813 for RADIUS.
>>>
>>> So, in other words, RADIUS traffic on the ports (officially assigned
>> for
>>> more than ten years now) will be blocked.  This seems like a very
>> poor
>>> example.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>