[tsvwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-19

Shwetha Bhandari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 19 February 2021 13:04 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietf.org
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 146AB3A0C17; Fri, 19 Feb 2021 05:04:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Shwetha Bhandari via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.26.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <161373987204.8434.11714626353174441048@ietfa.amsl.com>
Reply-To: Shwetha Bhandari <shwetha.bhandari@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 05:04:32 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/utfsWXlzIt7vGgUU9b3YlmOtLcE>
Subject: [tsvwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-tsvwg-transport-encrypt-19
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2021 13:04:32 -0000

Reviewer: Shwetha Bhandari
Review result: Ready

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

Summary:
This is an informational document discussing possible impact when network
traffic uses
 a protocol with an encrypted transport header.

This document lists some current practises, and the implications for some
stakeholders that depend on visibility of transport header fields for building
tools for network operations and management, when transport layer header
encryption is used. The document covers operational practises that assume
unencrypted transport header fields and also suggests possible alternatives for
network operators and operational tools designer  to utilize protocol features
for e.g. embedding OAM information by end-points in the network layer, and
fields that are available at network layer.  It also suggests issues to
consider when designing new transport protocols or features to explicitly share
observable fields with the network layer.

Hence with regards to operational considerations listed in RFC 5706 I dont see
any issues in this document.