[spring] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement-07: (with COMMENT)
"Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 02 March 2016 12:21 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: spring@ietf.org
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE751A1BC9; Wed, 2 Mar 2016 04:21:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.15.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20160302122134.23157.94919.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 04:21:34 -0800
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/k-UZVeAKj4fxhU_QHc321N4Nkv0>
Cc: pifranco@cisco.com, aretana@cisco.com, draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement@ietf.org, spring-chairs@ietf.org, spring@ietf.org
Subject: [spring] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement-07: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
List-Id: "Stacked Tunnels for Source Routing \(STATUS\)." <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 12:21:34 -0000
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement-07: 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-spring-problem-statement/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for adding the new security considerations text. My take-away from that is: - The architecture needs to have a clearly defined concept of domains so that you can strip source routes on ingress/egress, if needed. - We know there are (as yet unstated) security issues with source routing. The architecture document is where those are promised. Which document is that? Is it draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing? So far, that doesn't seem to be there, so we should expect more discussion to be needed if that remains the case. - You figure spring is ok-ish for MPLS, or at least no worse than today, is that right? - There is a need for a digital signature mechanism (or similar) for the IPv6 data plane. In which document would I find that? Is it draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-header? If so, that seems to call for pre-shared keys, which seems likely to be tricky, if we consider BCP107. I think we'll be heading for yet another discussion of the need for automated key management here. I'm ok with letting this document go ahead, but I do hope the WG have substantive discussion of the above topics and we don't leave that to IESG review of the documents concerned. I'm happy to try help get that done earlier if the WG are up for that as leaving it to IESG review is liable to be more painful all around.
- [spring] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [spring] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on dr… Stefano Previdi (sprevidi)