IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-15
review-ietf-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-15-secdir-lc-hollebeek-2026-03-11-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 16) | |
| Type | IETF Last Call Review | |
| Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
| Deadline | 2026-02-20 | |
| Requested | 2026-02-06 | |
| Authors | Samuel Sidor , Praveen Maheshwari , Andrew Stone , Luay Jalil , Shuping Peng | |
| I-D last updated | 2026-08-31 (Latest revision 2026-03-16) | |
| Completed reviews |
Opsdir Early review of -10
by Luis M. Contreras
(diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -10 by Mach Chen (diff) Secdir IETF Last Call review of -15 by Tim Hollebeek (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Tim Hollebeek |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | IETF Last Call review on draft-ietf-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/Wr-mktD8JiOI-5S_bcWLnlTfkWI | |
| Reviewed revision | 15 (document currently at 16) | |
| Result | Has issues | |
| Completed | 2026-03-11 |
review-ietf-pce-circuit-style-pcep-extensions-15-secdir-lc-hollebeek-2026-03-11-00
I'm not exactly an expert in routing, but I'm a bit concerned about the security considerations section. If my understanding of the descriptions of the security issues is correct, there are a variety of other complicated RFCs whose security considerations sections need to be read and considered carefully. There's a fair amount of subtlety, and it seems fairly easy to make mistakes with serious consequences. This is not entirely obvious without diving into the referenced security considerations. Perhaps the section could be expanded with better guidance about what choices implementers need to make to avoid introducing problems when implementing this RFC. I'm concerned that the existing RECOMMENDATION might be easily missed, with unfortunate consequences.