Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-20
review-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-20-secdir-telechat-weis-2020-09-24-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 28)
Type Telechat Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2020-09-22
Requested 2020-09-08
Authors Clarence Filsfils , Pablo Camarillo , John Leddy , Daniel Voyer , Satoru Matsushima , Zhenbin Li
Draft last updated 2020-09-24
Completed reviews Opsdir Last Call review of -17 by Dan Romascanu (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -17 by Mirja K├╝hlewind (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -17 by Brian Weis (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -19 by Brian Weis (diff)
Intdir Telechat review of -18 by Brian Haberman (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -20 by Brian Weis (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Brian Weis
State Completed
Review review-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-20-secdir-telechat-weis-2020-09-24
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/lgKS8vWiYGgpunNuZ26hMZxh7ik
Reviewed revision 20 (document currently at 28)
Result Ready
Completed 2020-09-24
review-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming-20-secdir-telechat-weis-2020-09-24-00
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.

A new sentence was added to Security Considerations in version 20. I believe
it, combined with the previous sentence, will help clueful developers
understand that there may be a need to add HMAC processing even if there is no
SRH header. Thanks. None of the other changes in the update appear to affect
security considerations.