Applicability of the Path Computation Element (PCE) to the Abstraction and Control of TE Networks (ACTN)
draft-ietf-pce-applicability-actn-12
Yes
(Deborah Brungard)
No Objection
(Adam Roach)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Ignas Bagdonas)
(Magnus Westerlund)
(Martin Vigoureux)
(Mirja Kühlewind)
(Suresh Krishnan)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 11 and is now closed.
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment
(2019-05-15 for -11)
Sent
I appreciate all of the references to the various security considerations in Section 7. My primary question in reading this section was “Does the use of PCE in an ACTN introduce any additional vulnerabilities/threats/residual risk and how is this addressed?” as this document was focused on the applicability of PCE in ACTN. (1) I wasn’t sure how [RFC5440] and [RFC6952] were applying specifically to the ACTN use case. (2) I wasn’t sure how to use the guidance in the third paragraph, “As per [RFC8453] …”. It notes that [RFC8453] outlines both needed security properties and threats; and reiterates that [RFC8453] states that ACTN should have “rich security features”. The link and relevance to PCE was not evident.
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -11)
Unknown
Adam Roach Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2019-05-15 for -11)
Sent
Thanks for this: we don’t do applicability statements often enough, and I think they can be quite useful.
Ignas Bagdonas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Magnus Westerlund Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Martin Vigoureux Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -11)
Not sent