[Sidrops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying-03: (with COMMENT)
Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 23 January 2019 17:46 UTC
Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sidrops@ietf.org
Delivered-To: sidrops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D9DA130FB5; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 09:46:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying@ietf.org, Chris Morrow <morrowc@ops-netman.net>, sidrops-chairs@ietf.org, sidrops@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.90.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154826560230.7563.12584828485918011085.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 09:46:42 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sidrops/VbDTawJAs1TfCvER3-4MJHS5qmc>
Subject: [Sidrops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: sidrops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: A list for the SIDR Operations WG <sidrops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sidrops/>
List-Post: <mailto:sidrops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidrops>, <mailto:sidrops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 17:46:43 -0000
Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying-03: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sidrops-rtr-keying/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) I don't really have a strong objection for this document being a BCP. However, while documenting two different methods, there is no clear indication of "what is believed to be the best" [rfc2026], or even better, which method should be used in what situations. I understand that operators have different preferences/needs and that prescribing one method as the default in not the right thing to do. I would really like to see some text (maybe a "Deployment Considerations" section) that talks about when one or the other might be preferred/considered. (2) §4: s/BGP Identifier [RFC4271]/BGP Identifier [RFC6286] (3) §4: "In the case where the operator has chosen not to use unique per-router certificates, a BGP Identifier of 0 MAY be used." rfc6286 defines the BGP Identifier as always being non-zero. rfc8209 says that "if the same certificate is issued to more than one router (and hence the private key is shared among these routers), the choice of the router ID used in this name is at the discretion of the Issuer." It seems to me that it doesn't matter which ID is used...it just can't be 0. The simple fix is to just remove the sentence. (4) §8: "Enabling the router-to-CA connectivity MAY require connections to external networks (i.e., through firewalls, NATs, etc.)." That "MAY" is out of place because this sentence is just stating a fact. (5) §8: "Note that the checks performed by the router in Section 7...SHOULD be performed." Besides confirming the checks from §7, I'm not sure what this sentence really contributes...but I do think that the "SHOULD" is out of place because the Normative language is already in §7. (6) Nits s/used by the the/used by the s/corresponds to the private used/corresponds to the private key used
- [Sidrops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on draft-i… Alvaro Retana
- Re: [Sidrops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on dra… Sean Turner
- Re: [Sidrops] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on dra… Alvaro Retana