Telechat Review of draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05
review-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05-secdir-telechat-nystrom-2018-03-08-00
Request | Review of | draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology |
---|---|---|
Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 06) | |
Type | Telechat Review | |
Team | Security Area Directorate (secdir) | |
Deadline | 2018-03-06 | |
Requested | 2018-02-15 | |
Authors | Donald E. Eastlake 3rd , Mingui Zhang , Ayan Banerjee | |
I-D last updated | 2018-03-08 | |
Completed reviews |
Rtgdir Early review of -01
by Martin Vigoureux
(diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -05 by Tim Chown (diff) Secdir Telechat review of -05 by Magnus Nyström (diff) Genart Telechat review of -05 by Brian E. Carpenter (diff) |
|
Assignment | Reviewer | Magnus Nyström |
State | Completed | |
Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-trill-multi-topology by Security Area Directorate Assigned | |
Reviewed revision | 05 (document currently at 06) | |
Result | Has issues | |
Completed | 2018-03-08 |
review-ietf-trill-multi-topology-05-secdir-telechat-nystrom-2018-03-08-00
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 document describes additions to the IETF Transparent Interconnection of "Lots of Links" protocol to support multi-topology routing of unicast and multi-destination traffic. One of the reasons for this multi-topology work seems to be to allow for the isolation of traffic of certain sensitivity. While the draft does refer to RFC 5310, it doesn't mandate its use. Should that requirement be made? This would seem to also increase assurances of legit actors in a given "campus"? Thanks, -- Magnus