Ballot for draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 04 and is now closed.
1) Sec 3.7: This section describes BFD Fault Isolation. It isn't clear to me that the S-BFD base spec has addressed this case at all. More clarification would be nice - either indicating that this use-case wasn't handled or having a small pointer to how it was.
Shouldn't Requirement #10 explicitly state active and passive attacks? That way you cover interception and passive listening too.
While this document has a security requirement, I believe there is also a risk of misconfiguration: if no handshake is performed, a node might send S-BFD packets to a receiver that does not exists or is not aware of it or sits at a different part of the network that is somewhere else than expected which can overload the network accidentally. Should this be mentioned in this doc (or somewhere else... or both)?