Telechat Review of draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06
review-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06-secdir-telechat-meadows-2017-12-09-00

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
these comments just like any other last call comments

This informational  draft describes two autonomic technical objectives for 
IPV6  prefix management  in large-scale networks, with an extension to support
IPV4 prefixes.  The focus is mainly on edge nodes, since it is assumed that the
network’s main infrastructure elements already have addresses and prefixes. 
The main purpose of the document is to be used for the validation of the
(GeneRic Autonomic Signaling Protocol) GRASP in  draft-ietf-anima-grasp-15 and
other components of the autonomic networking infrastructure described in 
draft-ietf-anima-reference-model-04. The technical objectives have to do with
efficient and correct distribution of prefixes with minimum amount of human
involvement. GRASP itself is  a generic protocol that enables autonomic nodes
to dynamically discover peers, to synchronize state with each other,and to
negotiate parameter settings with each other.  The application described in
draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06 clearly falls within the intended
application of GRASP.

The Security Considerations Section secdir review of
draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06 reads as follows:

 Relevant security issues are discussed in [I-D.ietf-anima-grasp].The preferred
 security model is that devices are trusted following the secure bootstrap
 procedure
[I-D.ietf-anima-bootstrapping-keyinfra] and that a secure AutonomicControl
Plane (ACP) [I-D.ietf-anima-autonomic-control-plane] is in place.

I’ve taken a look at draft-ietf-anima-grasp-15 and it provides an extensive
security considerations section that covers the security issues involved in
using it.  I do not see that draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06 introduces
any new issues.

Draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06 is somewhat unusual in that the documents
that it references in the Security Considerations Section are themselves
drafts, not RFCs. So it is possible (although I do not think very likely) that
changes in the referenced drafts could have an effect on the security
considerations of draft-ietf-anima-prefix-management-06.  Leaving that concern
aside, I consider this document Ready.

Catherine Meadows
Naval Research Laboratory
Code 5543
4555 Overlook Ave., S.W.
Washington DC, 20375
phone: 202-767-3490
fax: 202-404-7942
email: catherine.meadows@nrl.navy.mil <mailto:catherine.meadows@nrl.navy.mil>