BGP Wedgies
draft-ietf-grow-bgp-wedgies-03
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2005-06-20
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2005-06-15
|
03 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2005-06-15
|
03 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2005-06-15
|
03 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2005-06-14
|
03 | David Kessens | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed by David Kessens |
2005-06-10
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-wedgies-03.txt |
2005-06-10
|
03 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2005-06-09 |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Allison Mankin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Bert Wijnen | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Bert Wijnen has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Bert Wijnen |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Bert Wijnen | [Ballot comment] Figure 2 has: backup| |primary for 192.9.200.0/25 … [Ballot comment] Figure 2 has: backup| |primary for 192.9.200.0/25 primary| |backup for 192.9.200.128/25 and the para underneath figure 2 also speaks about those IP addresses. I guess the fact that I had the pen for ID-Checklist has sort of pre-conditioned me to see such things and state that it is not in line with RFC3330, which suggests: 192.0.2.0/24 - This block is assigned as "TEST-NET" for use in documentation and example code. ... Can easily be fixed in AUTH48 or with RFC-Editor note. Bert |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Bert Wijnen | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen by Bert Wijnen |
2005-06-09
|
03 | Alex Zinin | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alex Zinin by Alex Zinin |
2005-06-08
|
03 | Bill Fenner | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner |
2005-06-08
|
03 | Michelle Cotton | IANA Comments: As stated in the IANA Considerations section, we understand this document to have NO IANA Actions. |
2005-06-08
|
03 | Ted Hardie | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Hardie by Ted Hardie |
2005-06-07
|
03 | Sam Hartman | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sam Hartman by Sam Hartman |
2005-06-06
|
03 | Russ Housley | [Ballot comment] Very interesting document. It deserves an editorial review. There are a few typos that caused me pause, and they are pretty easy … [Ballot comment] Very interesting document. It deserves an editorial review. There are a few typos that caused me pause, and they are pretty easy to fix. I think that the figures could use more of the page width to make them easier to read. I agree with David Black's GEN-ART comment. It would be good to add a paragraph that talks about attackers making use of BGP Wedgies to cause traffic to flow in a manner of their choosing. |
2005-06-06
|
03 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley |
2005-06-06
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot comment] (from David Black's Gen-ART review) The Security Considerations section needs to have an additional paragraph added on exploitation of BGP Wedgies by an … [Ballot comment] (from David Black's Gen-ART review) The Security Considerations section needs to have an additional paragraph added on exploitation of BGP Wedgies by an attacker. A common theme running through the examples is that starting from an intended/desired routing state, loss of a connection can flip the collection of networks into an undesired state from which not only will they not flop back automatically when connectivity is restored, but from which significant administrative effort (based on knowledge that may not be locally available) may be required to cause a flop back into the intended/desired routing state. If an attacker can deliberately cause the initial loss of connectivity thereby producing the initial flip, the network impacts of the resulting state being undesired/unintended may be long-lived, far outliving the temporary interruption of connectivity required to cause them. If those impacts (e.g., cost, bandwidth limits) are significant, this could be an attractive attack vector, and examples of possible impacts should be listed. |
2005-06-06
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Carpenter by Brian Carpenter |
2005-06-03
|
03 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for David Kessens |
2005-06-03
|
03 | David Kessens | Ballot has been issued by David Kessens |
2005-06-03
|
03 | David Kessens | Created "Approve" ballot |
2005-06-03
|
03 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2005-06-03
|
03 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2005-06-03
|
03 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2005-06-01
|
03 | David Kessens | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Publication Requested by David Kessens |
2005-06-01
|
03 | David Kessens | [Note]: 'David Meyer will be the proto shepherd' added by David Kessens |
2005-06-01
|
03 | David Kessens | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2005-06-09 by David Kessens |
2005-05-02
|
03 | Dinara Suleymanova | Draft Added by Dinara Suleymanova in state Publication Requested |
2005-04-14
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-wedgies-02.txt |
2005-03-30
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-wedgies-01.txt |
2004-10-06
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-grow-bgp-wedgies-00.txt |