Last Call Review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-09
review-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2019-01-07-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 10) | |
Type | Last Call Review | |
Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
Deadline | 2018-12-18 | |
Requested | 2018-12-04 | |
Authors | Stephane Litkowski , Bruno Decraene , Martin Horneffer | |
I-D last updated | 2019-01-07 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Early review of -03
by Tomonori Takeda
(diff)
Rtgdir Last Call review of -08 by Tomonori Takeda (diff) Genart Last Call review of -08 by Dan Romascanu (diff) Secdir Last Call review of -09 by Phillip Hallam-Baker (diff) Opsdir Last Call review of -10 by Tim Chown |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Phillip Hallam-Baker |
State | Completed Snapshot | |
Review |
review-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2019-01-07
|
|
Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 10) | |
Result | Has Issues | |
Completed | 2019-01-07 |
review-ietf-rtgwg-spf-uloop-pb-statement-09-secdir-lc-hallam-baker-2019-01-07-00
The document describes the problem and solution pretty clearly. Unfortunately, there is no discussion of the security considerations which is not appropriate for a document addressing an availability which is a security issue. While microloops can form by chance, some consideration should be given to the possibility that an attacker could induce a loop to perform a DoS attack.