Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-06
review-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-06-secdir-lc-emery-2014-10-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2014-10-27
Requested 2014-10-16
Authors IJsbrand Wijnands , Eric C. Rosen , Uwe Joorde
I-D last updated 2014-10-30
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -06 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -06 by Shawn M Emery (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -06 by Susan Hares (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Shawn M Emery
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 06 (document currently at 10)
Result Has nits
Completed 2014-10-30
review-ietf-l3vpn-mvpn-mldp-nlri-06-secdir-lc-emery-2014-10-30-00
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 proposed standard draft describes a protocol extension that allows the use of
Multicast Extensions to Label Distribution Protocol (mLDAP) for MultiProtocol Label
Switching (MPLS) multicast traffic without the current set of restrictions for deployment.

The security considerations section does exist and discloses that the proposal only involves
a way of encoding an element in an existing protocol.  The section goes on to describe that
no new security concerns are applicable because of this and refers to the security considerations
of mLDP and Multicast VPN-BGP for the overall security implications.  I agree with this assessment
and with the claim that there are no new security concerns with the proposal.

General comments:

None.

Editorial comments:

The "Requirements Language" section does not exist and the associated text looks to be in the
"Introduction" section.

Shawn.
--