Last Call Review of draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib-14
review-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib-14-secdir-lc-melnikov-2014-02-19-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 15) | |
| Type | Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2014-02-14 | |
| Requested | 2014-02-06 | |
| Authors | Thomas Nadeau , Kiran Koushik , Rohit Mediratta | |
| Draft last updated | 2014-02-19 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -14
by
Meral Shirazipour
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -14 by Meral Shirazipour (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -14 by Alexey Melnikov (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -14 by Sarah Banks (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Alexey Melnikov |
| State | Completed Snapshot | |
| Review |
review-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib-14-secdir-lc-melnikov-2014-02-19
|
|
| Reviewed revision | 14 (document currently at 15) | |
| Result | Has Nits | |
| Completed | 2014-02-19 |
review-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-mib-14-secdir-lc-melnikov-2014-02-19-00
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 working group chairs should treat these comments just like any other last call comments. This document describes managed objects for configuring and/or monitoring Virtual Private LAN services, including LDP and BGP extensions. The document says that information in 3 defined MIB modules is not sensitive and thus not really worth protecting from passive monitoring. I doubt a bit this claim, as it seems that observing information from the MIB tables can help an attacker to mount other types of attacks on a particular VPLS. It also looks like gaining write access can enable Denial-of-Service attack on the monitoring system itself and/or on the underlying infrastructure. I also agree with Benoit Claise's DISCUSS that the document should follow the recommended MIB-security template: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-security Other than that, I have no security concerns in regards to this document.